This user declares his annoyance at browsing through articles initiated by US or UK users which fail to mention that the theme has to do with one of the two countries (arguably because they assume that English language wiki means "English/American wiki").
The return?
Can we say you are at last back from your Commons peregrination? Not much to report from my side, expect to point out a couple of articles that might be of interest: Creangă and Ghenadie. Oh, and this was an exciting episode. At least it did, in fact, backfire, although it ended "without prejudice to reopen if more evidence can be presented at a later date", and the final paragraph of the PCR article remains somewhat degraded. - BiruitorulTalk 15:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The thing about commons is that I could do a lot there printre picături - unfortunately for everyone, I was doing the sort of things in RL that just didn't allow me to concentrate more (but lo! what treasures have I uncovered). I did the occasional "sneak preview log-on" thing over, but it seemed like I kept getting orange bars from Wynona, Annitas and the bots, plus some tangential problems that would really sort themselves out. It's not keeping up with my friends that I regret most.
And then, whoa, I was inactively active, which apparently saved the country. I will never cease to congratulate myself for that, except to say that the anti-USLists would better come up with a better strategy than staying home, say, by December. And they better clean up their own act. The Prigoană defection is a good omen, IMHO.
But enough of that. Seeing I'm not so sure where I'll be by the end of the week, I'd best make good use of the editing and chatting time I still have. No RL stuff, just in-universe fun.
I'm sure you've seen me pulling the Stakhanovite all-nighters on the two important Drăghici redlinks, and I think I know which one you liked best. Somehow, they're both in sync with my love for paradoxes and nuances, like building blocks that meet up just right. Tudor-Păstorel-Drăghici, and you get Romania in a nutshell.
But yes, as you remind me, there are other subjects, and would you believe it, I had actually read both those articles in print, in two of only three Adevărul issues I bought this year. Serendipity? divine mission? or am I being dreamed of in your dream? Since it's about me, it's probably somethting greater and more symbolic than all three combined. [Room for Anittas to insert his reply on the subject here; then delete at my convenience.] Dahn (talk) 08:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review: probably the only time I've gotten three for one article. I'll have a look at some of your pending nominations soon. As a testament to how much work some areas still require, this was in fact our first ever article on a building in Romania's sixth-largest city, one that is perhaps not chock-full of tourist attractions but still has a clutch of old churches and a bunch of other interesting buildings. Much the same could probably be said for a couple dozen other cities. We've barely scratched this surface. Another thing that's been swirling around my mind are the dioceses: Râmnic, Severin, Strehaia, Huşi: there's a lot of history there too. Or the variousprincelycourts, the centuries-oldhighschools (hello, competent Hungarian editors on en.wiki, if you still exist!, although those of us whose grasp of Hungarian is so tenuous could still write about the Călata Autonomous Republic, maybe in time for December 1st), but I'm probably getting ahead of myself.
Having to guide someone to deletion a second time is tiring, but at least the sockpuppets liven things up. - BiruitorulTalk 18:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Here is what I meant about the sort of diocesan histories we're missing. It could use some polishing, but I'll probably send it to DYK this week. - BiruitorulTalk 05:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I may use this space for a bit of a complaint: how to respond to this? Granted, it's not an insurmountable hardship, but still, nearly two weeks of waiting (and still no word on Râmnic!) results in what seems like a series of quibbles. First I'm supposed to either cut out material (it seems relatively pertinent to me, and I don't think I'll do that, at least until Ioan Popasu gets written) or "make things very clear for the average reader", whatever that means. Then the hook is supposedly too long and not detailed enough, and then I'm supposed to "cite" something the text makes abundantly clear (at least to me). Bail me out, Capataz! - BiruitorulTalk 21:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no need to apologize: I'm sure dozens of people saw the nominations and passed up a chance to review them, for whatever reason. Anyway, your reviews were quite welcome: they gave me a morale push to finish my latest piece (looks like I'm on the ș/ț dark side for the moment). When I do nominate it, I hope things move faster — I think we might even use the tower as a DYK illustration for that batch, having as it does the distinction of being famous in Romania, not so famous outside, but still eye-catching (at least to me). - BiruitorulTalk 04:59, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Mărgărita Miller Verghy. I would like to invite you back to comment on a follow-up proposal. Cheers. Kaldari (talk) 22:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
I made a stub at ro.wp yesterday. Feel free to edit/move/change/correct as appropriate, you did a great job on the en.wp article and the ro.wp one is small tribute. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Sandu Tudor
nominate
) 08:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Fondane Fundoianu.jpg)
Thanks for uploading
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
Thank you for writing a very valuable article. Dahn (talk) 23:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Viorel Chivriga
I strongly appreciate your willingness to write good articles. But, since when an article is discussed not based on arguments? Can you please explain that to me. In case you can prove that the article is not reliable, it doesn't meet any wikipedia standards, I will ask for deletion myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breaking Good (talk • contribs) 12:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BIO. These are the wikipedia standards. And it's not reliability we're discussing over there, but notability. Is Chivriga notable by wikipedia standards. No, he is not. Moving on, if you please. Dahn (talk) 12:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply
Salut, țin să te felicit pentru articolul Nicolae Iorga pe care într-un viitor mai apropiat sau îndepărtat îl voi propune la AB (poate se vor plânge unii că ar fi prea lung și trebuie împărțit în sub-articole). Oricum, m-am apucat să-l traduc în română (sper că nu te superi :) și pe pagina de discuții au apărut deja întrebări. Vreau să-mi spui, dacă îți mai amintești, titlul cărții lui Iova. Mulțumesc anticipat.Ionutzmovie (talk) 15:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
"Eu stiu engleza, o simt in mine, o mai repet putin, cam o luna, si gata." -- Gigi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cei Trei (talk • contribs) 12:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Să trăiască nea Gigi! Dahn (talk) 10:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[majestic titan] 20:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Iorga
Aruncă o privire la commons:Nicolae Iorga, am populat categoria cu imagini pe care poți să le introduci și în articol.Ionutzmovie (talk) 20:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cecilia Cuţescu-Storck are all redlinks. I'd opt for an "Elena" theme: Ceauşescu in the middle, flanked by Băsescu and Udrea. Or, barring that, Ecaterina Teodoroiu: a pretty straightforward character, and plus there have been no Oltenians since these
were withdrawn.
Speaking of women, I need a bit of moral support. Did I have a point here, or was I totally off? Let's hope this goes a little better. - BiruitorulTalk 03:29, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, in due time - unless you want to jump in first. I was also pondering adding to that: I chanced upon a recent issue of Magazin Istoric, with a Totok article about the Bucharest Archbishopric locum who was a Securitate informant...
Yes, and it's a waste of taxpayers' money. If equality is what's needed, they should just renounce all portraits - the very principle of a republican nation represented by its "best and brightest" on its bills (in the crudest form of interaction between people) is farcical; and it's only as a republic that we started doing it. They should just have abstract designs or faceless groups, or bridges, if I were to have a say. Plus, this feminist travesty is, as I understand it, a reflection of the fact that Romanian women are underrepresented in Romanian culture; and they are. That might just be a historical fact, so what does their artificial overrepresentation achieve? I mean, those links are still red because, well, the women in question are relatively obscure, even by Romanian standards. Our provincial culture was held up by provincial men - if we have to have portraits that represent that culture, then we might as well stick to the fact.
Yes, you did, and yes, let's hope so. If it might take me a while to throw in my 2 cents, it's because I'm fed up with some of the keep voters' arguments. Dahn (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merī Kurisumasu, and I certainly hope that, having survived the end of the world, we'll see a renewed burst of activity from you come 2013. - BiruitorulTalk 22:21, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo, it looks as though you're back. I want to start off on a lighthearted note: Ceauşescu in Peru. It's quite funny; I just hope "those" people don't see it. They'd surely miss the irony about "intensification of dialogue" and consider the "accord for promoting investments" on a par with the Potsdam Treaty.
As I predicted, János Scheffler degenerated into the sort of pettiness I loathe. He's now "Hungarian-born"; we can't mention the state of which he was a citizen for most of his adult life, because that would "confuse readers" who "never click links" into seeing him as an ethnic Romanian; and we can't mention Austria-Hungary either, because "there was no such thing as Austro-Hungarian citizenship". We also invent the idea that he took Romanian citizenship after Trianon, when in all likelihood he did so after the Romanian Army took Satu Mare in April 1919. But hey, at least we now use the word Szatmár five times.
Now here's a situation. A fellow maintains his own biography and that of his deceased wife; they lookawful. I come in and pare things down, but now those versions are probably about to go because that fellow and another fellow start shouting COPYVIO!!! Really, though, does this look like a copyvio to you? Does this? I don't really care about this situation anymore, but it's discouraging.
As I (patiently) await any comments you may have, permit me to express my extreme ire at a certain situation. Some months ago, Category:Freemasons was revived, which is good news. The bad news is that a certain user has done all in his power to whittle away at the category. First he tried getting it deleted; didn't work. Then he put up that rather pompous warning. And finally, he's been consistently removing the category based on his esoteric POV.
With regard to Category:Romanian Freemasons, we had about 40 and are down to a handful. Some were removed because they're unsourced in the article, e.g. him. I can sort of buy that, even though they're all sourced at List of Freemasons and it feels rather odd to stick in "[X] was a Freemason" in isolation simply to justify the category. But what I find intolerable is something like this - for someone like Cuza (and all the other '48ers), their Freemasonry is most assuredly a notable characteristic, in spite of this user's POV. In fact, quite a bit more notable than his Orthodoxy, but I see he leaves that category untouched.
Speaking of which, if the Freemasonry category is to function somewhat like the religion categories (and it should), the removals appear even more absurd. Category:Romanian Orthodox Christians includes figures like Theodor Stolojan, Petre Roman, Adrian Năstase, Relu Fenechiu or Victor Ponta even though their Orthodoxy is in no way a notable characteristic of theirs. I mean, when I think of Fenechiu, his religion is not the first or the second or probably the tenth thing that comes to mind, but it still seems logical to have him in the category. But somehow we can't have Bălcescu when, in fact, his Freemasonry was quite important? I don't like what's happening.
Ah, and I have
I'm not going to touch the Freemasons with a pole, not yet at least. The way I see it, what they're doing is exactly as moronic as the alt text experiment. Whatever "solution" they think they're enforcing over there, and whatever sort of Americana spillover these "rules" are, I'm willing to bet consensus will change over and over again until the two sides figure out for themselves that nobody outside the US cares about what "exposure" might do to the historical Freemasons. (Incidentally, what I don't get is how on earth they even picture that the Grand Masters" subcat in category is a good substitute for "Freemasonry in Romania" - are all Grand Masters from Romania?) Dahn (talk) 19:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm sorry, ten times sorry, for all the stuff I left hanging. But was it worth the wait? Dahn (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, absolutely. But I'm learning new things every day: apparently, you can say stuff in an AfD and have it count as evidence of notability! And this from an administrator... - BiruitorulTalk 05:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This crap all over again. I suspect the notability standards in some areas are intentionally lowered just because many editors would also like to see themselves/their families meet the criterion. Take a deep breath, live to fight another day, that article will simply survive as a virtual shrine until the larger problem is addressed. Or forever... Dahn (talk) 13:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we shall see. But now that I have your ear, Mihai grunfeld is also up, as is Stefan Ramniceanu (may or may not be notable, but we shouldn't be using his autobiography, even if he gave us permission). I note that Codrin Țapu also has a page. Cezar Lăzărescu is by his daughter, but he does seem to have a claim to fame. All right, so let me ask about a few more. There's Nicole Valéry Grossu: looks like a bit of a memorial to me. Then Arise Gheorghe, Arise Ioan!, which cropped up around the time of the Mihail Neamțu flap. What about Laura Poantă? Cristina Trăilă? (Keep in mind she was not elected to Parliament.) And finally, what about Dobrujans? Is this like Oltenians or Muntenians? - BiruitorulTalk 15:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Expert Barnstar
The Expert Barnstar
I hereby award you the Expert Barnstar for your outstanding contributions to
Kewl, thanks! Dahn (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Moment
Hi. Do you have any data/info to add to
Moment (Bucharest)? I can't find anything. --Soman (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for the feedback. --Soman (talk) 18:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lingura de aur
"Mie îmi place luxul. Am nobleţe în sânge. Asta nu înseamnă că nu mănânc şi cu mâna, dacă nu am furculiţă, nu dorm şi pe o cârpă, dacă este nevoie. (..) Mie îmi place să mănânc cu lingura de aur. Am cumpărat linguri şi furculiţe de aur. Am dat 30.000. Mama şi familia nu vor. Dar eu ce am observat? Ia o lingură de aur şi bag-o într-un ceai. Să vezi cum moleculele transmit căldura mai bine şi simţi căldura, temperatura după cum pui mâna pe lingură." --Cei Trei (talk) 18:22, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great. Now, do Căcărău. Dahn (talk) 19:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I had to google that. I don't have to do the Cacarau. You're working for Him, remember? It's that time of year again, when he's begging for money in order to afford traveling and paying off his whores. --Cei Trei (talk) 14:40, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You mean God? Wasn't He dead? Get with the program, dude, do Căcărău. Dahn (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean to say that the co-founder of this site is god ... eh. But yeah, I can see where what I wrote above can apply to organized religion. There are some similarities between the two. --Cei Trei (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I see you changed "Hungary" to "Germany". I have the booklet in front of me, and on the cover it says: "conflux, Pont Publisher, Budapesta 1998"; on the inside of the front cover it says: "Drepturile acestei ediții aparțin editurii Pont, Budapesta; H 1300 Budapesta, Kiskorona u. 2, tel/fax +361.368. 80 58 ... Editor: Szávai Ilona" etc. Best regards,--Mycomp (talk) 09:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's been quite a while since you've edited this article, but since you're its lead author, I wanted to make sure you're aware that it's undergoing a GA review. Cheers, Homunculus (duihua) 08:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Richard Dawkins
I'm too tired to instigate, so I'll just throw you these two titles: The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype. In the first book, Dawkins introduces the idea of the meme (which is superior to Popper's World 3 nonsense by actually being scientific). I remember you using that word in a message to Bir, and I got this feeling that you haven't read the book, just by the way you used it. I could be wrong, though. Anyhow, it's a great book and it certainly makes you look at the world from a whole different perspective. There were many times that Dawkins left me breathless; and I had to throw away the book for days so to avoid a nervous breakdown (others are said to have contemplated committing suicide). It's such a tragedy that our country can't produce scientist like Dawkins. Instead we got ... meh. Oh, I almost trolled there! Almost! See, I'm getting better. Maybe one day I'll be an outstanding citizen like you and Bir. :) Later! --Cei Trei (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
bai ... ba ... uai! eu cu cini (sic) vorbesc, uai'? --Cei Trei (talk) 12:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lolz, I think that user used google translate to have that line translated. And it translated "bai" as bathrooms. hahaha!
"Regulamentele nu sunt la fel. Nu ştii că leul... peştele mare îl înghite pe cel mic? Tigru-i tigru, leu-i leu, elefantul e elefant. Steaua este elefant." Gigi. --Cei Trei (talk) 21:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Domnule Dahn, am nevoie de erudiția dumneavoastră dovedită. Puteți găsi surse bibliografice care să confirme pluralul plăși pentru singularul plasă, ca unitate administrativă subdivizionară de ordin doi a României Mari? Există tot felul de utilizatori de tip Toma Necredinciosu' pe ro.wiki. care contestă pluralul, care (conform opiniei mele) este o problemă simplă de bun simț românesc. Wars (talk) 21:39, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas, Dahn! I'll be traveling to Lanzarote in a few days so I can just as well wish you a Happy New Year! since I won't be checking on Wikipedia so often. Yeah, I'll be climbing some mountains, go on a cycle tour, jogging, sunbathing, maybe go for a swim. You know, relaxing and having fun! You should try it some time. It's not all about visiting death camps and the home of dead poets that no one cares to know about! Oh, I should tell you about this book that I'm reading! It's called Moneyball and it's about a bunch of guys who uses statistical analyses in baseball while applying a psychology factor to their formula. It's great! Their ways have impacted the world of sports and it's now creeping into some business models. Here's a citation from Chapter 5:
"When you think of intellectuals influencing the course of human affairs you think of physics, or political theory, or economics. You think of John Maynard Keynes's condescending line about men of action--how they believe themselves guided by their own ideas rven when they are unwittingly in the thrall of some dead economist. You don't think of baseball, because of don't think of baseball as having an intellectual underpinning. But it does; it had just never been seriously observed and closely questioned, in a writing style sufficiently compelling to catch the attention of the people who actually played baseball."
...and this: <<"When the numbers acquire the significance of language," he later wrote, " they acquire the power to do all of the things which language can do: to become fiction and drama and poetry.">> (The Field of Ignorance)
Okay, so the point that I'm trying to make here is that a bunch of mathematicians and scientists, instead of going to work for Wall Street, where the real dough was to be found, instead followed their passion and did what they loved the most; and in the process, left a legacy. That's what it's all about, Dahn! Not to do pompous things and look down at what you see as trivial (sports, for instance). Well, this was my Christmas wish for you (lolz). Take care, Dahn! :) --Cei Trei (talk) 07:45, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Dahn. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bot requests. Message added 19:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I'm reading Cicero's Philippics against Marcus Antonius. That was some major trolling from Cicero's part (if we use Wikipedia's definition for trolling). It's amazing 'cause while you read it, you realize how alike people were in their reasoning, when they went to criticize and provoke others, even if it happened some 2055 years ago. You know, the thought process and all. It follows similar lines. I recognized myself in many of his comments, you would too, I'm sure. Yeah, maybe you're right, I should first finish the book and acquire a better understanding about the art of provocation before bugging you, 'cause you're like this lizard that keeps adapting to my bite and it's such a pain! Right, so what's new with you? All good in the hood? Heard the bad news? The mass of the Higgins particle is fucked by a few percents, so our universe is gonna die out in like some tens of billion of years from now ... unless we go from type 0 to type 5, or something. Umm, yeah, what else should I tell you. Meh, I'm reading this book, The Actor and the Target. It's alright. After that I'm gonna check on Last Ape Standing. Maybe you should, too. Yeah, what else ... let me think. Oh, I emailed Jmabel and he's well. Yeah, I'm telling you this because I know you care. You come from that part of the world where people have big hearts. Like our guy who's gonna donate a million Euro to Mount Athos. Smell you l8r. --Cei Trei (talk) 15:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to tell you that I sent in a sample of my saliva to 23andme.com to have my DNA mapped and they found out that I'm between 0.7 to 1.4% Ashkenazi Jew (I can never get the name right so I just call them, or me I should say, Ack!). I informed Jmabel of this, hoping we'd connect and stuff (him being a Jew, also), and suggested he'd map his DNA, too, but he said he don't care about any of this stuff (between you and I, I don't think he likes Jews very much). Anyhow, is this why you ignore me, 'cause I'm Jewish? But Dahn, us Jews are people, too! Yeah, there's more to say about this, but I think I'll save it for another time. I hope you won't view me any different now. I'm still the same guy, Dahn! Just try to look beyond the labels that others put on people! --Cei Trei (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's gotta be the explanation of why I don't dislike you as much! What can I say but mazel tov. Dahn (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You and Beer should have a look at this article. If it doesn't piss you off, there's no more hope for you. Dry lectures ... that sounds familiar. --Cei Trei (talk) 19:09, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
bro, go to scribd and download for free The Extended Phenotype. cmon, i aint trolling now. pls just do it. u can also join Richard Dawkins foundation. why u gotta be like that, turning ur back to this stuff. u know it aint right. this is the kind of stuff u should be paying attention to, not the shit ur writing about. ok, sry, im sure that what u write about has its merit (insert laughter here), but this is the real deal, u know? cmon, it wont hurt, go to scribd, download and read the first chapter. u got nothing to lose. and i know u havent read it, cause if u had, u wouldve seen things differently, u know. i wouldve seen it in u. --Cei Trei (talk) 12:47, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "
Romanian topics
Thank you for the broad and profound coverage of Romanian themes and people, sharpening our perspective - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
A year ago, you were the 57th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. I miss the photographer, again, and put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
untitled
I gotta admit, Dahn, you surprised me. Is this the way you act, walking in the library and setting the books you don't fancy on fire? Dahn the Censor ... that's your new title. You remind me of Octavian who burned his uncle's poems because he was jealous of his genius. Then he named the month of August after his title, stripped February of a day so that August would match his uncle's month of July. WELL, OKAY, DAHN! It's all fine and dandy, if you feel like burning my poetry, go ahead and do it! You made your point, no need to change the name of March, even though I'm sure it would gain consensus on Wikipedia. January, February ... Danus! All would vote in favor of that, the only one voting against it would be you, of course. Yeah, you're a real Cincinnatus, you! Retreat to your little farm, just you and the lady with the elephant heart, or something. Oh, what? You got elephants on your farm? Well, sure, after all the name of Caesar is believed to mean elephant killer, and you're a killer, alright! Dahn the Elephant Killer, or just Dahn Caesar. Oh, I proclaim you king, Dahn! But Dahn humbly replies, "I am Caesar." Ok bud, you're Caesar. --Cei Trei (talk) 23:06, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Two movies that you would enjoy watching: The Words; The Intouchables (this movie is reminiscent of our relationship ... I'm the black guy in that movie). --Cei Trei (talk) 19:11, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dahn, are you ok? You haven't been around for some 3 weeks and I'm getting worried. I can imagine that at your advanced age, your engine is not what it used to be, but I hope spring will show mercy on your old bones. In the words of Robin Williams, "spring is nature's way of saying, 'let's party!'" :))) --Cei Trei (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated. Dahn (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to hear that. Fun stuff! Have a fine Easter, and, er,
Can you kindly look at this article? I found a reference in the Rumanian language translation of which into English is poor. I have made use of only in sentence in the lead with this reference Academician Alexandru Borza about Rapa Rosie from Transylvania. May I request you to look into this article and also add more from the Roamanian sources.--Nvvchar. 00:47, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can you assist with this article Dahn? Hope you are well.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 10:38, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I never expected you to be in your thirties. If something in your behavior suggested that, then I really am a dumbass for thinking you as an old man. Over the years I created this image of you and in my mind you look like Mr Burns, drive like Mr Bean and talk like Stephen Hawkins. My bad! It's funny, really, because just now you felt very real and full of vitality. Before, you had no character to me, you were sort of empty, full of dark matter, and I had to 'recreate' you. This got me thinking about this really interesting book called The Mating Ming: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution by Geoffrey Miller. Miller explains how the brain is like an entertainment system that some potential sexual partners find it interesting, how its different qualities find compatibility with some and reject others, etc. What I'm trying to say here is that I think you're my Platonic love. --Cei Trei (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tough love. But yeah, you'd be right about my driving skills. Dahn (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry-ass attempts at outing, btw. Dahn (talk) 07:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That name I will never forget. I remember that name from a certain forum, after a certain user handed his forum account to me after losing a bet ... and he forgot to change his addy. To paraphrase 'you', 'face parte din farmecul vietii'. A game well played, but perhaps a bit bitter for my taste. --Cei Trei (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating that map for me. It was a nice gesture, which I took for granted. Hope you are well. --Cei Trei (talk) 09:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill[talk] 17:36, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Moving romanian social democracy article?
Hi. Hope you are doing well. I posted a comment at
Talk:Romanian Social Democratic Party (defunct). How would you feel about having that as a general overview article on the socialist movement in the country, and with links to individual parties? It's difficult to argue that the 1910 PSD is the same as the 1927 PSD, and likewise PS, PSU, PSDI etc needs articles of their own. --Soman (talk) 04:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
Hm. It would require some pruning and a lot of changes in related articles/categories. If you are willing to take care of that task as well (and I am willing to help you carry it through), I have no real objection.
But please, could you sandbox it before applying the changes? I feel that would cut some corners and show exactly what parts you mean to change and what parts will be left as is. Dahn (talk) 07:23, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, good. I'll work on it at User:Soman/temp in the coming days. --Soman (talk) 12:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shestov
hello, mister dahn, thanks for the wonderfull article about shestov. I have a question. I'm writing a novel about two friends. About how they become friends, how the friendship ends after a big incident and afterwards how the friendship starts again. And in the end, the friend dies. (sorry for my very poor english, the words are right but i don't control it enough to really tell what the story is about) But the thing is, i would like to use some fragments of shestov in the book. And also, i like the article you wrote about him, and i would like to use also a fragment of it. Is this possible ?
greetings
johan petit from Belgium
this is my email adres [email protected]— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.198.85.95 (talk) 19:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I did not write the article on Shestov. Do you mean Fondane, perhaps? Dahn (talk) 07:26, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dahn! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women artists. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women artists, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women artists on Wikipedia.
If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women artists page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement!
SarahStierch (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
Hi Dahn, I noticed your revert. I do not quite understand your comment ("i note the old war on redlinks is back. also, for some reason, now we don't like pictures that are any bigger than postage stamps?")
I am not aware of any old war on redlinks.
The Rules of thumb and Size --> indicate: ...As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). If an exception to the general rule is warranted, forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding..
Hence my edit, just wanted to inform you. Lotje (talk) 11:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Concerning the first objection: you turned several redlinks into redirects toward corresponding articles on Romanian wikipedia. This, I propose, is a bad move - the readers of English wikipedia are not going to learn anything from articles written in languages they do not understand. Moreover, the redirects removed the redlinks, thereby discouraging the creation of new articles from them, and making it exceptionally hard for someone to work back on reintroducing those articles as links into this article, as they are created (it would require manually resetting the links to their original form, whereas once filled, a redlink is filled throughout wikipedia).
The other objection: precisely, in this case it was warranted, and it had a paramter in the image coding that you removed. For instance, at 220 it is impossible to pick out Bacalbaşa from the the Sotir picture, and expects the reader to click the picture just to see it at all. Dahn (talk) 10:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The return?
It's sure looking that way, so let me welcome you back! I don't want to overwhelm you with stuff, so let me keep the list down to a minimum.
Edit the problem out of existence? Any assistance would be appreciated. And I hope you do stay around on a more durable basis this time. - BiruitorulTalk 04:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is good to be back, but I can't promise constancy, alas. I'll just address the last one, because it's quite urgent: I think you could easily revamp it to read like looser paraphrasing, that should solve it in a minute. Dahn (talk) 10:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You were never gone. --Cei Trei (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well… the site of the Deva library happened to go down today, so I can't look at the original source just now, but am I getting anywhere? - BiruitorulTalk 20:56, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My sincere thanks for alleviating my worries. And I know you're busy with other things, but I can just sense that the pithy comment you'll have to make about Claudiu Teohari (and perhaps Angela Hondru) will be a memorable put-down. - BiruitorulTalk 17:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just caught the Bassarabescu expansion: nice! I knew there was more to be said about the man, and it's great you were able to say it. You think "I. A. Bassarabescu" would be more fitting as a title? I don't have a problem with a move.
And something that popped up: this. I opined behind the "Copy of speedy nomination", although I may do so again, on principle. - BiruitorulTalk 20:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Biru. I'm sorry I'm still elusive these days, but I thought of coming back with a bang, before anything else.
From my side, I could not have gathered momentum to write the Bassarabescu article where it not for your fine sketch -- I still enjoy expanding on your writing more than anybody else's (mainly, because I know there is very little to change). So you have my thanks for that one as well, and, yes, I'm glad you enjoyed it. The name: it's either way; while "I. A." is slightly more common, and carries the advantage of not making us pick between "Ion" and "Ioan", both are just as good -- in these situations, I tend to favor the random norm of "we used this before that". I will honor your choice.
I have glanced over the debate you mention and, obviously, you're right -- as you remember me, I still cannot fathom why they had to change the name, not why they "have to" have the categories consistent with that name, even at the expense of other anachronisms. I am still laissez-faire in my approach on that one, but people seem to only want to get their feet in their mouth at all cost. I will comment there once I ponder the options.
My main annoyance for now is the son-to-father redirect, which reminds me of the terrible shape the father article is in. If you should want to stub or housekeep either of these over the next few days, as you did with Bassarabescu, you would be doing a lot for my planned workload. (The prospect of reading through the same sources twice in such a short time is a turnoff at the moment.) Incidentally... what happened here? Dahn (talk) 14:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your first question: it's largely a rip-off of Cheșchebec, and I just mined deeper.
You mean you actually wrote it and half of it got lost? That's horrible. I'm willing to jump in there as well, with an expansion etc., but I have to take a break now.
Yeah, and I note it's from a great contributor, no less... I'll put this in the "to-do" pile.
Nistor is notable, apparently, and they made a film about her weird career; but the article is painful. Laura Poantă... meh, borderline... but the article, I believe, merits a stubbing and a through AfD debate. Dahn (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, and Stamatiad is now in working order.
Latin Europe has become a disambiguation page. - BiruitorulTalk 14:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
Not to jump on you as soon as you pop back in, but, in declining order of importance:
Sextil Pușcariu: I cannot think of a more qualified reviewer, if you so wish.
This
.
Mircea Popescu: I don't know what's more irksome, the army of fake accounts or the real one voting to keep based on "39 inline citations".
On this First of April, the 70th anniversary of the entry into force of the new orthographic norms that replaced the fluctuations that plagued the old system with a scientific model based on the phonetic principle, although which, unsurprisingly given the persistence of anti-revolutionary elements, had still not been fully embraced five years later (q.v. Hristea, Valentina, "Abateri de la normele ortografice în unele publicații literare", Limba Romînă, VII (1959), nr. 1, p. 81-93), let me warmly commend you for the work you have done in advancing knowledge of Romanian philology, across all regions of the Republic, from Pitești Region, even to the Magyar Autonomous Region (although remaining mindful of the Leninist imperative to respect the self-determination of national minorities within the socialist system, including linguistic rights with enthusiastic support from all organs of Party and State), above all to the glorious Stalin Region! - BiruitorulTalk 19:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Stalin Region has always been on my heart and mind, which is why I jumped at the opportunity to unmask a bourgeois ideologue posing as a philologist, thereby warning the working men and women of Stalin (Stalinists? Stalinians? Stalinlings?) as to the poison in their midst. Dahn (talk) 19:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do have a small anecdote on that theme: a relative of mine was named Brașoveanu, and during the '50s, he called himself Stalinescu.
With that, your presence on a few fronts would be greatly appreciated. If you have a little time, do drop in and I'll point out what's cropped up. - BiruitorulTalk 21:55, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hope to. Soon. Dahn (talk) 08:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now that it seems you're back at full blast, let me raise a couple of issues. Thanks for the fortified churches involvement. A few uncitedstatements did creep in there during the review, but I suppose I can deal with those later.
We should find out soon enough
what happens here. At least the discussion was entertaining - I didn't mean every word I wrote, being gradually animated by a certain imp of the perverse
that took hold as I waited for someone to close, but as I say, a good exchange.
Finally, I do think it's time to take another look here. An IP (from the Washington DC area, perhaps the subject himself) recently removed that section, only to be reverted a couple of hours later by this guy, who hadn't edited in five months. There is clearly something fishy going on. - BiruitorulTalk 14:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing: Bartolomeu Constantin Săvoiu. You will laugh. Will it be the the illustrious genealogy, the Tariq Aziz photo (as though the man didn't subsequently almost face the hangman), the chronicle of his service as right-hand man of Chirac? Or will you last until the masonic apron image? I don't know, but I'm almost certain you will be entertained at some point. - BiruitorulTalk 03:50, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if you're back on any sort of basis, but if you are: this is languishing (we should perhaps already change "newly-elected" to "recently-elected"), this is a bit newer and then there's this. Any help with either of the first two would be much appreciated, and as for the third, that may be of passing interest too. - BiruitorulTalk 18:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In this period of fruitful interactions - let me reiterate my thanks for Diaconu and especially for the Popa work, although don't forget the mess at Adevărul! - let me bring up a couple of things.
. I tend to think he's marginally notable - emphasis on "marginally" - but I like this: "In conversations with [his sons], he discarded the idea of leaving Romania in order to settle abroad, reaffirming that he belonged to the Romanian culture". Now, from what published source would Valentin Sahleanu know that?
Emil Simon, by Monicaesimon. This one I'm a little more skeptical about, simply because, although he's only been dead a couple of months, there were essentially no obituaries. Looks like another Zoe Țapu on our hands.
Anyway, what say you to all this? - BiruitorulTalk 19:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. Imna have to do some mulling here. Dahn (talk) 21:20, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I don't understand why you reverted my edits like this one.
Jewish people have the right to be liberal, conservative, socialists and communists too, just like any other ethnic group on this planet.
I don't understand why Category:Jewish communists can't be created also. On Category:Communists by nationality there are all kind of nationalities, except Jewish.
Can you explain please why you reverted?
Thanks.
— Ark25 (talk) 13:17, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah... Well, for once, that is a highly controversial way of categorizing, as per Jewish Bolshevism -- this is part of the reason why the category tree does not exist, and was deleted every time it was created. Secondly, your categorizing segregates the article from the much more relevant Category:Romanian communists, where those entries clearly belong. Thirdly, to boot, it is simply not an option to start segregating all articles in all the Romanian politicians series by ethnicity -- quite clearly so when they are already included in relevant ethnicity categories, as well as in politicians categories that address their citizenship. Certainly not for something that is controversial to say the least.
But, with your "they have the right" canard, why do I suspect you're just the recent avatar of a very nasty troll? Dahn (talk) 13:25, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And no, Jewish is not a "nationality" (click the link, read the article), and the category tree never includes it under nationality. That is why they are only there through their actual nationality, which is the Romanian one. Dahn (talk) 13:27, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And it was only an edit conflict with Dahn's deletions that prevented me from making the same edits. Such categories have been repeatedly created in an apparent attempt to disparage subjects, and should not be accepted in Wikipedia. RolandR (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
1. I don't really believe it's a controversial (or inflammatory) issue. Jewish nation has people to be proud of and some people not to be proud of, just like any other nation. Also, Jewish communists were not bad by default. Some of them were enthusiastic communists and even supported Stalin in their naivety but later they changed their mind and spoke against communism and against communists. I think the subject of
Jewish kapos is much more "controversial" than Jewish communists - for those who incline to consider it controversial, of course, not for people like me. Jewish communists existed after 1945 - Category:Israeli communists but they also existed before WW2. Comparing this with Jewish Bolshevism
makes no sense, since Jewish Bolshevism is a just an (idiotic) speculative theory, while Jewish communists are an undeniable reality.
3. The word "segregating" has some racist connotations. I was not segregating, just splitting. Recently I created ro:Categorie:Parlamentari români de etnie maghiară (Members of Romanian Parliament of Hungarian ethnicity) and that makes a lot of sense to me. Also I think it was a good idea to create the category ro:Categorie:Evrei români membri ai Academiei Române (Jewish Romanians members of the Romanian Academy) for example, so the readers can find about people who both Romanians and Jews are proud of.
I do not master the English language. M-W.com says "canard" = fabricated report. I don't understand. Jewish people can and could choose to be communists just like French people for example. So, yes, they have the right to do so - nothing fabricated here. Avatar of a nasty troll? I know there are wikipedians with extreme right views and all kind of other views, but I'm just not one of them. I edit Wikipedia since Oct 21, 2007 and just today I become the user with the biggest number of edits on Romanian Wikipedia - [1]. So I am no-one's "reincarnation".
I am very far from being antisemitic. In fact, I admire Jewish people and their politicians who take care about their own people like no other ethnic or political groups. And, as a Romanian, I know that's the first lesson I have to learn from the Jewish people - to be united with my people and to take care of them ("friends know why"). And I don't really believe such a category can help those with antisemitic agenda - they already have their own lists for sure. It makes complete sense to have this category, even if the fascists will try to use it. We can't ban knives or clubs because antisemitic people can use them - that would be nonsense. I don't think Jewish Bolshevism or Category:Israeli criminals should be deleted because the fascists can try to use it to disparage at subjects. To me, this looks like an unjustified fear that it's counter-productive for Wikipedia, but well, I won't insist much more on it. — Ark25 (talk) 16:08, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Enough. Take it to the admins, if you really wish to pursue this, and change the consensus somewhere where it's visible, not on my page. Dahn (talk) 16:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
if the guy is being polite, why do u have to be a bitch? --Cei Trei (talk) 22:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Anittas, your butthurt is boring. Dahn (talk) 10:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Articles
Glad to see you're still here and beating off the trolls! Looked through some of your past articles earlier and you know most of them are easily GA quality and could be promoted very easily. The main problem is the amount of red links, which I personally have no problems with but they'd need to be either stubbed or delinked; I know you're not happy creating stubs, I don't create many these days either! Nicolae Xenopol looks a clear candidate for starters, reducing the red links might be the first step.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great to see you around, friend! I promise I'll look into this next week, for now I'm just drifting around aimlessly. Dahn (talk) 18:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You once said that you deserve the Nobel Prize for making peace in the ghetto. Here's the next best thing, coming directly from the heart. Cei Trei (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, you ain't no Swedish Academy. Close, but not yet there. Dahn (talk) 08:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dahn, I admit I had made mistakes while creating the article The Wrath of the Gods (1914 film). I wanted to know if you could suggest me how to make the article better.--Skr15081997 (talk) 11:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dahn, I have fixed the spaghettilinks on the above article.Skr15081997 (talk) 15:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cimbalistu
Dahn, this is your post from 16:57, 15 December 2013 Dahn (talk | contribs) . . (140,211 bytes) (+1,331) . . (Undid revision 586208696 by Dahn (talk) actually, that is relatively okay) (undo | thank) Please explain to me what has changed between now and then. So then you left it, but now you wish to erase it, because Tismaneanu's son erased it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cimbalistu (talk • contribs)
Consensus. That is what has changed. I had opted to revert myself and leave that in, noting that it was relatively okay (despite its atrocious format and POV), in the hope that it would be cleaned up and trimmed of drama. In doing so, I tried to avert further venom of the kind I have received for the last 7 years on the article's talk page.
In addition: Sir, you leave little to the imagination as to who you are what your intentions are regarding this article. It is high time I begged you to consult
the conflict of interest policy. Dahn (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply
That's fine — the thing is slightly chaotic and I'm sure a fresh look will uncover some areas for improvement. You're also just in time!
On another note, any idea what this is? Anuarul Universității din Iași? It certainly looks serious enough - Gafton is, well, Philippide's successor as department chairman - and surely there will be a few things to pick up from those six articles. If you want to take that on, I won't object ;-) - BiruitorulTalk 23:30, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, I'm still sore from Rainer. I'm also focused on... something else (hope I'll finish it in this window of time I have these days).
It looks legit, but I wouldn't use the link to it, mainly because it's likely to go stale in no time.
Btw, when do we DYK Rainer? (This time, we'll share credit.) Dahn (talk) 23:35, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's like saying Holinshed should take credit for a batch of Shakespeare plays. I'm glad to have started off the skeleton of the article, but would find it a bit out of place to share credit. So, do go ahead and nominate it; it's (almost all) your brainchild.
One the something else is out of the way, I've got an idea going ahead. I was looking over the names of the Romanian Academy's various institutes, and found that six of them are still redlinks: Nicolae Simionescu, Gheorghe Zane, Costin Murgescu, Alexandru Rosetti, George Oprescu and Mihai Ralea. While the first three may not be that exciting, the latter three probably are. And since you've mentioned Ralea's name in a variety of articles, that might be a suitable project for the near future.
I read Craii de la Curtea-Veche these past few days. I'm still wondering: are you Pantazi or Pașadia? And who is our Pirgu? - BiruitorulTalk 16:16, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Heehee. If it's between you and I, I would tend to assume that I'd be the Pașadia; you seem to be more together, all in all. We keep getting Pirgus, but they keep getting banned.
Zane was a pretty interesting fella, and so was Murgescu. But yes, Ralea would have to take the cake, and I have been pondering it for a while -- between my pondering and now, the resources have popped up all over the place. But yes, all in due time. Dahn (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to see you've taken up Ivașcu. I've been meaning to work this in for a while, but now I'll leave it to you, if it's helpful.
My interest in the man was sparked by a (rather tenuous) personal connection: as I've mentioned, Laurențiu Fulga was married to my grandmother's sister, and Fulga's daughter has been a very close friend of Ivașcu's daughter since the '60s. A couple of anecdotes. The man was quite a connoisseur of the arts, and had a particular penchant for glass icons. He wouldn't settle for buying them in Bucharest, but instead drove around to isolated village workshops in Transylvania, hunting for the most authentic pieces - or dispatched agents to do so when he was otherwise engaged. A strict disciplinarian, he taught his daughter correct posture by having her walk around the house all day with a plate on her head. Perhaps rebelling against such an upbringing, she turned out a bit of a wild child. One summer at the Black sea, she slightly corrupted Miss Beligan (who is now very far removed from Romania) with alcohol and boys. An apoplectic Radu and his wife promptly sent their girl back to Bucharest and ordered her to stay away from the Ivașcu household. I don't think any of this is really scandalous, but if you want to be on the same side, feel free to blank this paragraph after reading.
Note those red links steadily turning blue, even if they're little more than stubs. The pressure for Ralea is becoming insurmountable!</joke>
Category:Euroscepticism in Romania: hm. Category:Romanian nationalists: hmmm. Eminescu and Vadim, indeed. Speaking of Vadim, I do at some point want to turn Romanian Hearth Union into something more than a screed. Oddly, I haven't been able to turn up sources indicating that it's petered out, actually that it did so around 1992-1993. The article implies it's as active today as in 1990, which is obviously misleading.
Finally: do you think we should mention Philippide and the Jews? On the one hand, there's this: he did bring up Tiktin and (as you recorded in the article on him) Șăineanu in relation to their citizenship problems. On the other hand, especially when you compare him to, say, his faculty colleague Xenopol, he seems hardly to have been preoccupied by Jews. So, either way is fine with me. - BiruitorulTalk 16:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have to take a sabbatical. I promise I'll be back with something on Ralea, as well as fresh eyes on those categories, but for now I'm just tying up some loose ends and will then fade away to deal with RL business. Alas. Dahn (talk) 11:08, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, there's that thing about Philippide. Of course, by all means, we could have a sentence or two. I'll add to that when I can, either just before or just after the aforementioned sabbatical. Dahn (talk) 11:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fear not, I am still in the land of the living, just in an Internet-free situation for a few more weeks (the present moment excepted - greetings from the capital of Moldavia, where, should I emerge from an alcoholic coma into which my gracious hosts plunged me last night, I will try to at least find Philippide's house). Great work on Ralea and everything else. One small request: at the article on Victor-Viorel Ponta, could you please, in the infobox, add in his religion, with a citation? There now being no doubt whatsoever... - BiruitorulTalk 07:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you may have observed, I have now more or less returned, and I do hope the absurd Ralea "issue", which must have weighed you down at least a little, can now move forward.
Speaking of DYKs, I note Maria Forescu is now on the main page. I also note most of it is based on someone's personal website. What do you make of the categories? While her native city was, of course, briefly part of Romania, that came long after she'd left the area, and although she did adopt a Romanian name, I'm not sure to what extent she was, say, a "Romanian civilian killed in World War II".
I'd like to start some AfDs; your thoughts on the notability or lack thereof for the following:
Dmitriy Grigoriyev
?
Finally, I note the creation of
Emin Bektóre; all could use some cleanup. - BiruitorulTalk 18:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
Welcome back! I was going to call you back myself to hear you weigh in on the Ralea issue, but I felt like I was going to be pestering you (still unsure whether you had full internet access) and, with all the inept accusations thrown around, it looked like it would only encourage the "indicates an agenda" guy to insinuate that you and I have a racket going. But yes, absolutely, thank you for that.
It's interesting that I had to spend all that time explaining how "not instantly verifiable" is not the same as "unverifiable" while Forescu slipped on Main Page with that kind of sourcing. Also, the article is poorly edited. And, to tell you the truth, I think there's just not enough sourcing to tell what she was: she must have, at some point in her life, carried a passport of some sort. Was she naturalized? Was she indeed Romanian by some fluke (like, being issued a passport by the Greater Romanian authorities some time after 1923)?
Other such discoveries
prompted me to secretly pray for your swift return online.
I have no idea who those people are, so I might need to put on my thinking cap and mull for a short while -- meaning, of course, that my guess is as good as yours. Well, actually, I know who Ms. Nahmani is, but that's only thanks to the hours I've spent, like a million years ago, watching afternoon television with the elderly. Dahn (talk) 19:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Lord, did you see this gem on rowiki? At a glance: "Vechi cuzist, al cărui rol de spion nazist era notoriu pentru publicul românesc...", "escroc binecunoscut", "agent al Gestapoului" - A.L. Zissu, "spion german în Franța". - așa l-au caracterizat pe Radu Lecca, în mod nedrept și superficial diverși indivizi, bazându-se pe modul în care activitatea acestuia le-a afectat interesele individuale sau de grup. Culmea avea să fie atinsă la procesul "Marii Trădări Naționale", în actul de acuzare, Radu Lecca fiind descris drept : "reprezentantul tipic al agentului hitlerist, care-și trădează țara prin orice mijloace pentru scopuri și avantaje personale servind conștient și fără nici un pic de conștiință scopurile cele mai criminale urmărite de hitlerismul hrăpăreț și distrugător". (This is from the same editor who seems to have used the Romanian article on anal sex to instruct users about its perils. He also seems not to have any clue about copyright legislation.) Those administrators on that project are still severely incompetent. Or vile, which is the same thing. Dahn (talk) 00:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously, look over that guy's edit history. It's making my head spin. Dahn (talk) 00:55, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Paging Andrei Stroe: please clean up the mess in aisle three. Not sure what else to say, except to hope they'll get sick of him (he's been flooding the Cafenea with rants, so maybe that'll do it).
Take your time with those AfD candidates; I've nevertheless started with
I don't think I can improve upon it in the time it takes for it to be featured on Main Page. I appreciate the editor's good intentions, but I really wish people would not expect featured status for articles on subjects they can't at least read about in a local language. In this case, the glaring problem is the article is entirely referenced with tertiary sources, which would normally have disqualified it from DYK (but who bothers to check that sort of criterion?). Eh, to be addressed at some point in the future. Dahn (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed him when he was editing ro:Asasinatele din 29/30 noiembrie 1938, which gave me an eerie feeling, but I didn't have the time and skill to sieve through that mixture of facts and personal interpretations. However, your revert caught the attention of some more competent wikipedians, who found some places where he's clearly jumped the shark and challenged him. Now he seems to be digging his own articles' grave. We're moving much slower than here in our little village, but things are moving.- Andrei (talk) 19:27, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bless you. Dahn (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination of Francisc Rainer
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! MelanieN (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply
Comintern affiliation, though he had opposed it? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ilie Moscovici. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Communist Romania with documents exposing the fascist past of Romanian exiles, only to find himself subject to similar accusations? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mihai Ralea. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Following the annexation of Crimea, Russian parliamentary speaker Vladimir Zhirinovsky sent a letter to the governments of Poland, Romania and Hungary, proposing a joint division of the country.
This message was accidentally sent using an incorrect mailing list, therefore this message is being resent using the correct list. As a result, some users may get this message twice; if so please discard. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Voting for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year now open!
Nominations for the military historian of the year and military newcomer of the year have now closed, and voting for the candidates has officially opened. All project members are invited to cast there votes for the Military historian and Military newcomer of the year candidates before the elections close at 23:59 December 21st. For the coordinators, TomStar81
Hi Dahn! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, —DerHexer(Talk) 01:01, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Thanks for your substantial edits to the article Ion Agârbiceanu. I am thinking to nominate it as a good article. What is your opinion? Please reply on the talk page of the article or on my talk page. Gug01 (talk) 22:59, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Gug 01[reply]
Hi again! Since January 5, the article has been expanded greatly. Do you think the article is ready for GA? Please reply on my talk page, where I can reply quickly. Gug01 (talk) 20:22, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diligence
Hi! Thank you so much for your contributions in the field of Romanian history, particularly helping to bring the Ion Agârbiceanu article to B-class. Gug01 (talk) 23:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it was my pleasure. Dahn (talk) 06:59, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
. Wikipedia is not a directory of every domestic murder.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be
deleted for any of several reasons
.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the
Not my article. I started the redirect, which I think you should consider restoring instead of deleting the link itself. Dahn (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I saw your contributions and was wondering if you have any information, or could point me a direction, on Sava Temišvarac (Sava of Timișoara), a military commander in the service of Transylvania?--Zoupan 03:35, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Articles for deletion/Ahmed Shawki (socialist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, out of curiosity, as you mentioned them more than once, which are the other national charts available in Romania? I am not a Romanian and I don't know any other chart. I would like to take a look at them. Thanks in advance, Cavarrone 16:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ion Agarbiceanu
Hi Dahn, the article Ion Agârbiceanu which you helped to greatly expand is currently under GA review by Winner 42. Winner 42 has pointed out a number of mistakes in our article. Please help us to correct these mistakes. Gug01 (talk) 12:44, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. I'll hold on to this notification. This should be fun. Dahn (talk) 15:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But incidentally: didn't we go through this process at least once in the past? Me and Biruitorul must have merged physically since then. Dahn (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[majestic titan] 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
A barnstar for you!
The Special Barnstar
I think this is the single largest expansion of an article I've ever seen. How are you doing it?? I assumed you may be translating from ro.wiki, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Number57 14:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, do you happen to have any data sources for the results of pre-1919 elections in Romania? I'd be very keen to get my hands on some. Cheers, Number57 14:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. To answer your first question: I've researched it (including the paper sources). But the article itself took months to write, bit by bit, I just decided to save it today; this is why the expansion appears more imposing than it is. (As an aside: Romanian wikipedia is largely a failed project, and I am not involved with it.)
The second question: I've struggled with that myself. There are to my knowledge only fragmentary and incidental accounts of the results, which one may find by scouring through the period newspapers here or here, or in various books that deal, for instance, withe the career of elected officials (such as
Z. Ornea's biography of Constantin Stere). More topical sources might exist, but I have not found them anywhere. It took scouring through two separate sources to tell me that the PND only managed to have 2 parliamentarians before 1918. Dahn (talk) 14:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Wow, so you do it all offline? It's a shame regarding the lack of sources – I will have to do some digging in the British Library. Number57 14:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I usually edit in a widow and preview, but only save when I get reasonable progress. Dahn (talk) 14:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea that 60KB is "reasonable progress"! Number57 15:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are most welcome. And sorry for misunderstanding that Pacheco tidbit. Either way: good article, good hook, a pleasure to review. Dahn (talk) 17:34, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see you were involved in a 2006 debate to delete this category (among others); you were part of the overwhelming majority against this category clutter. The category was duly deleted but almost immediately reinstated and another debate is ongoing, but this time Welsh language activists are conducting a determined and vocal - if irrelevant - campaign to keep it. You may like to help the other side again! --The Sage of Stamford (talk) 11:50, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On 7 November 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bessarabian Peasants' Party, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ion Buzdugan, poet and deputy of the Romanian nationalist Bessarabian Peasants' Party, was chided for his poor grasp of the Romanian language? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dadaglobe submissionGaw54 (talk) 18:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dahn, Given your contributions to related articles, I thought you might find this article draft also of interest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dadaglobe I welcome any suggestions or edits you might have to improve the page. This is only my second Wiki article and I'm still learning the ropes.
Could you, please, give me an email address where I could contact you for an advise I would like to ask? Thank you. (I am only writing in English to better integrate in this page, I am a Romanian too.)
Arhitectul (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
On 9 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ieremia Cecan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ieremia Cecan, a regional leader of the Romanian Nazi Party, campaigned for the unification of the Orthodox and Catholic churches? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ieremia Cecan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 6 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ioan Bianu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that being a thrifty man, bibliographer Ioan Bianu raised cows on Romanian Academy grounds in downtown Bucharest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ioan Bianu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ioan Bianu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
To your first point: I'm trying to become a bit better about that of late, largely by putting things in chronological order, at least. Though it's not always intuitive.
To the second: I do, actually, create those narrower categories sometimes. (See Category:20th-century American short story writers, for instance.) There are several reasons I don't do it more often. The chief one is that I tend to not like creating smaller categories. So something like, say, Category:20th-century American essayists would be plausible (though the parent category is just at the threshhold where I'm not sure about it) might be viable. But Category:20th-century Romanian essayists is small enough that I wouldn't consider it. Also, I tend to flit about from subject to subject when I edit, and I like having things in a basic category like that, because I'm not sure if/when I'll get around to breaking it down. I am changing a bit in that regard, and part of that is discovering new capabilities with AWB that I hadn't considered before. So it's a work in progress.
To your point about overcategorization: I haven't found it to be much of a problem often, honestly, and most of the time I do encounter it, it can be pretty easily remedied with some judicious pruning. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:57, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And there, too, is part of the problem - it would never have occurred to me that there were 277 articles in the category Category:Romanian essayists. (Largely because I didn't realize our coverage of Romanian writers was that strong.) So I never would even look there to consider creating a narrower cat.
On 13 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ioan Kalinderu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that though Romanian courtier Ioan Kalinderu lacked any interest in horseriding, he did so every day after reading that it was fashionable among lords in London? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ioan Kalinderu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ioan Kalinderu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Bonifaciu Florescu
On 19 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bonifaciu Florescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian literary scholar Bonifaciu Florescu had the reputation of an unrepentant bohemian and allegedly slept on a pile of hay? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bonifaciu Florescu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bonifaciu Florescu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I am today at page 222 in "Copilaria unui Netrebnic". I am fascinated by the description of Jewish holidays, food, speech in Dorohoi. It is familiar and foreign. I am from Siret a shtetl 30 kilometers vest of Dorohoi. The vocabulary describing my childhood Jews is Yiddish or German. Calugaru's characters speak Romanian. Thus "dreptul de la Stefanesti" turns out to be
"Der Tzadik fin Stefanesti" in a minor Aha moment. I am puzzled. Did the Jews in Dorohoi in 1907 speak Yiddish or Romanian? Did Calugaru translate the dialogs into Romanian for the benefit of his educated Romanian readership? The first names of the people are clearly Yiddish: the boy Mochi (Motye diminutive of Mordekhay), the oldest brother Ițe (Itzye diminutive from Itzhok), the Mother Țipra (Tzipoyre in Yiddish, Tzipora in Hebrew), the father Țalic (Zelig in Yiddish, of German not Hebrew origin) but the boy's name Buiumaș I can't match (is it from Yiddish Burikh? Barukh? Hebrew). The surnames are Romanian and I believe them to have been thus in 1907 Dorohoi. In Siret (Sereth, Bukowina) our family names were German. Whenever we met a Jew with surname such as Pantofaru, Croitoru, etc. we knew he was from the "Regat" (Romanian Kingdom before 1918).
I am translating into Romanian The novel "Brennende Doerfer" by Leo Katz. It describes Sereth in the same year 1907 as Calugaru's Dorohoi. It got its title Burning Villages from the same 1907 Moldavian peasant revolts that dominate Copilaria "Copilaria......"'s first chapter: "1907". The contrast in the lives of the Jews in these two close by shtetlykh, during the same year is striking.
Question: Does it make sense to add a section with the Jewish ethnographic perspective to the "Ion Calugaru" English Wikipedia article?
Do you know of any similar attempts? Is it the wrong place. It may be of interest to American Jews. Also more Israelis read English than understand Romanian. Probably it would not interest the Romanian reader at ro.wikipedia.org
On 1 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anastasie Fătu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Moldavian pediatrician Anastasie Fătu proposed a ban on open-casket church funerals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anastasie Fătu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Anastasie Fătu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Your article on Mircea Eliade is the most comprehensive article about a historical figure that I have yet to encounter on Wikipedia and--the edit history proves--your dedication to making/keeping it that way is truly inspirational. ScheherASAde (talk) 09:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, can I interest you in contributing towards this? If you and a few others get some people together I can create a 1000 Challenge for Romania if you want it like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Turkey).♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:05, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The
Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon
, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you.
is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Voting for the Military history WikiProject Historian and Newcomer of the Year is ending soon!
Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.
Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[survey 1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[survey 2] The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.
You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to [email protected].
^This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
^Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
elected deputy sparked an antisemitic riot? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Scarlat Vârnav), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.
If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.
About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or [email protected]. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
March Madness 2017
G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:
tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.
Romanian Senate election of 1868, which consolidated the "reddish" liberal legislature, was held in July, when many conservative voters had left on vacation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Romanian Senate election, 1868. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Romanian Senate election, 1868), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
Wallachian princely election only to hamper other candidates? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Alecu Filipescu-Vulpea), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
Hello! Thanks for reviewing my DYK nomination. Just wanted to let you know I responded to your comment. If there's anything else I need to do, please let me know. Thanks! Jgefd (talk) 18:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
On 18 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Poor Dionis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a rhyming passage from Mihai Eminescu's novel Poor Dionis proposes "that this world is merely dreamland and a cat's fantastic vision"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Poor Dionis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Poor Dionis), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 19 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Luceafărul (poem), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in creating his Luceafărul myth about the impossible love between a deity (pictured) and a mortal, Mihai Eminescu may have been influenced by the Katha Upanishad? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Luceafărul (poem). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Luceafărul (poem)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello! could you please have a look at Rano M. Shaiza I have changed the hook as advised. Thank you. FITINDIA 19:58, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Fitindia (talk·contribs). Thanks for following my suggestion, but please note that I was not reviewing your article, merely making a quick comment. Dahn (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your prompt reply Dahn. Cheers FITINDIA 20:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You were warned to drop the stick and have failed to do so. Because of this, you are blocked for 48 hours. Next time you're asked to drop the stick and move on, I highly recommend that you consider your actions and do so. Thank you. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 16:33, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oshwah, you are right in saying that I should not have responded after the warning, and, though the warning only referred to me editing other pages, I should have inferred that it also referred to the topic itself. I do not object to the block, I do not ask for it to be lifted, and I accept it is deserved under the circumstances. Please note, however, that I was responding to very serious and entirely unsubstantiated allegations, also published after the editor in question was similarly warned (but never blocked). These claim that I run several accounts, that I also contacted and seriously threatened the other user, on an outside forum (one I never ever wrote on), and that all of my edits constitute "subtle threats" (an unfalsfiable accusation). This while the user admitted to harassing by noting he had posted on my talk page (and elsewhere), over and over again, messages he believes "only I would understand", under the assumption that I am whoever he imagines I am. What would have been the appropriate response to this, without violating the warning? Even opening a formal investigation for harassment would have presumably violated the warning, if it applies to any page. Supposing I initiate one after my block, using the claims made in SPI as evidence: will I be in violation of the warning? I'm asking because I am actually considering this course of action, and would not like to find myself blocked again. Dahn (talk) 23:55, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dahn, the essence of "dropping the stick" is that you stop responding--one of the reasons you are asked to do so may well be that someone, an administrator for instance, thinks that nothing useful can be gained from further comments, and that further comments are indeed counterproductive. You'll just have to accept that from an admin, or suffer the ensuing block. So the appropriate response, after y'all were going back and forth for a few days, including in the SPI, would have been to leave it be, and to leave it in the hands of the admins looking into the matter. And if you drop the stick, and the other doesn't, then you must have faith that the other editor will suffer that consequence. Since you've been here for over 90k edits, we can expect you to be better than you were. Further investigations or whatever should have followed a decision in the SPI--lest you also be accused of forum shopping. Does that make sense? Oshwah, I have some faith, some, that this won't be repeated. I have also left a note at the SPI and on the other user's talk page; I'd appreciate it if you had a look at those. I support an unblock for Dahn--and if he returns to this matter, or taunts the other party (who, IMO, is really guilty of harassment and disruptive editing), then the block should be reinstated. But I hope Dahn will not pick up this stick again, and if he does, it will be to place it in the hands of the community or an administrator, without a million follow-up posts. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking into this, and both Oswah and you are clearly right to point out my failures of conduct (in my defense, the SPI comes after years of harassment, a harassment intensified during these past weeks -- though that should not ultimately matter, as I should have known better). I will only add that I did not actually start a new investigation, not did I mean that I would start one while the SPI is ongoing -- that would be shoppy. The problem that needed clarifying here is that my block came not after a comment in the SPI (I have not added anything there), but after a reply on the other user's talk page. I can accept that I was being out of line, and I do not contest the block I received, but I had to ask basically if I was still ever allowed to comment on the topic, this while the other user had continued to publish more and more serious allegations; in other words, whether I can, at some point, defend myself, or ask for a new investigation, or whether that too would be in breach of the warning. Your clarifications to me and warning for the other user have addressed that. Dahn (talk) 02:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I trust Drmies' judgment, and I also appreciated your understanding and your response. You're unblocked now :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 03:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for zillion of articles created or improved. And very cool work on {{Template:Country data Wallachia}} and {{Template:Country data Moldavia}}. Codrin.B (talk) 12:06, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I hope you arent vexed by my two recent reverts of your edits there: the Ypsilantis flags was probably never used in Moldavia, and the 1840 Moldavian flag was probably never used at all (there was a Crimean War during that interval, but Im not sure Moldavia counts as a belligerent, or if she had time to put up a special flag before the Russians, then the Austrians, flooded the scene). Putting them as options would arguably lead to anachronistic usage, which is what my edits were experimentally trying to avoid. But we can of course discuss if you object. Dahn (talk) 14:37, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Prince of Wallachia Radu Paisie was deposed by his Ottoman overlords in 1545, with measures taken to prevent his "abscond[ing] with the treasury"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Radu Paisie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Radu Paisie), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
Please stop this edit war. Cupcea is clearly a psychiatrist - manager of the Cluj University Psychiatric Clinic. He certainly made contributions to many other fields, but that does not make him a cardiologist or geneticist. These are professional categories. Doctors have to qualify in particular specialities. No evidence that he did that I can see. If you can provide contrary evidence please put it on the talk page for this article. Rathfelder (talk) 14:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are proposing that I follow your POV as the benchmark, and as such that I violate a core policy of wikipedia. And as such, you are removing articles from relevant categories, never to be retrieved again, because you feel that their contributions, however debatable, do not qualify them for the relevant domains. This is particularly problematic since you are pushing your view on articles from an era were specialization was less relevant than contribution, and preventing for instance people researching the history of cardiology in Romania from accessing data about doctors active before said narrowing. This though quite clearly Cupcea was considered a cardiologist and a geneticist, enough for him to lead institutions and programs in those fields. You are wasting my and the community's time, and come here to stop the "edit war" when you're the only one so far pushing for that POV -- two editors have reverted you, and when I approached you on your page about a similar edit, you simply ignored me. Please either cite the consensus, not your personal impressions, or leave those pages alone; I have other things to do than waste my time on your entrenched preferences. Dahn (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Its true that specialisation was much less advanced at that time. But that does not make him a cardiologist, unless you can produce more evidence. He clearly trained and worked primarily as a psychiatrist, a very different field, even then. Eminent scientists often contribute to papers and research outside their own field. That does not qualify them to claim specialised status. The place for this debate is the talk page of the article, not here. Rathfelder (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked you to first of all provide evidence that the consensus on wikipedia is to include as cardiologists only doctors who had a formal specialization in the narrow field, and not also those who, at a stage in their career, were recognized as authorities in the field -- such as directing specialized institutions and research in the narrow field. Unless you will produce this evidence, your claim that I should follow your POV on the matter and answer to your tailored concerns created from it is utterly irrelevant. If you want to have a debate on the article's talk page, start it there, but hopefully not by repeating yourself with the same self-referential claims. Dahn (talk) 16:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No. Perhaps you can cite where this rule you refer to can be found. As we stand, such categories were routinely added to articles about people who made contributions to the field, as doctors of whatever background, and no one seems to have taken issue with this until you decided that we need "better" -- namely, that we should follow your POV. The article on cardiology clarifies nothing as to our categorization policy, and your vague suggestion that I should peruse the category is not just pointless, but also self-referential -- I would have to look at a category you yourself pruned, from your perspective, with massive silent edits. I repeat: what is the consensus here, and where has it been stated? Did you even check to see what it was, before you bombed wikipedia with your edits? Dahn (talk) 20:39, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cardiologists are not defined by wikipedia but by the medical profession. Rathfelder (talk) 08:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
1) You are not the medical profession yourself, you are just a guy with an opinion. 2) We are not discussing what is the "
truest" criterion for defining cardiologists, but what the standing wikipedia consensus or policy says on this matter, which is one of categorization and is designed to help the reader find articles, not give professional validation. Dahn (talk) 09:00, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
I am not going to discuss this further here. You and I do not agree. The talk page for the article, or
WikiProject Medicine, is the place for such discussion where other people can be involved Rathfelder (talk) 10:34, 21 October 2017 (UTC).[reply
]
I should not be expected to start debates on topics that you engineered out of the blue, and which address your arcane views; you should be able to provide a single piece of consensus or policy that endorses your view, and in fact you should have checked whether this is the consensus before starting to remove thousands of articles from their categories. So either present the consensus or start the debate yourself and let me know what you came up with; in the meantime, I am under no obligation to follow your directives as to what article should go in what category. Dahn (talk) 10:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
2017 Military Historian of the Year and Newcomer of the Year nominations and voting
As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to hear from you! And thanksies. It's great to see you as well, and I'm glad you liked it. It seems I am sometimes returning to topics from back in the day, maybe I can pester you to do the same, and join me in this from time to time? Say, like writing more stuff on the Movilești? Dahn (talk) 07:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User group for Military Historians
Greetings,
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.
On 14 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Costea Bucioc, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that statesman Costea Bucioc, who reputedly survived a poisoning attempt at the Moldavian court, was later impaled by the Ottoman army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Costea Bucioc. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Costea Bucioc), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 18 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A. de Herz, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1919, Romanian playwright and journalist A. de Herz was court-martialled for alleged collaboration with the Central Powers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A. de Herz. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A. de Herz), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
It's an issue with AWB. AWB always, to my knowledge, adds new categories to the end of the list rather to their proper place. I'm not technologically savvy enough to know of a fix - if you know of one, please point me in the direction and I'll do my best to incorporate it. I've not known of one yet. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:12, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well...yes, I take your point. It would mitigate some of the issue, but (in my experience given the way some category trees are) it's also possible that a different sort of mess might result.
I suppose I've been a bit wary of creating more narrowly-defined categories because I know there are varying schools of thought on having male-gendered categories in the first place, and I'm still being a bit ginger about the issue. Perhaps it's silly, at this juncture...I think, for lack of a better way to put it, I would have preferred to see evidence of another by-nationality category for male writers before striking out on one. Safety in numbers, and all. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:28, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well...for every category that exists, I've seen a couple that have been deleted. I've seen the broader categories kept, but I've seen narrower categories deleted.
Personally, I happen to think that male-by-gender categories are useful. That's why I've created a bunch. But I've been involved in a couple of fairly lengthy discussions on the subject - a couple of years back - at
WP:CFD. And in both cases the categories were deleted. Which is why I say I'm not sure consensus is there yet. I think it is changing, slowly, but I'm still not convinced it's there. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
To your question about large categories - yes, actually. I tend to view them as useful in a different fashion from subcategories, as I find they can give a useful broad overview of a topic. For something as broad as gendered writers, at least. If I had to parse further, I have complex reasons for these feelings.
I'm beginning to change my outlook a bit, but it's slow...and it's recent. And a lot of what I'm chewing on is the result of conversations I've had off-wiki with other editors, very recently. (After these edits were made, actually.)
If you don't mind, I'd be happy to go into this further off-wiki, for a couple of reasons. Not least because I don't want to clutter up your talkpage with a wall of text. :-) (Just hit the e-mail link at the bottom of my talkpage.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To Dahn: This gratuitous category changing being done by Ser Amantio has gone far outside the bounds of constructive editing, and must stop. I have dozens of examples of thoughtless changes and outright factual errors that he has done over the past several weeks and months. I will be reporting it to higher editorial authorities. Do you agree, and what is the proper procedure involved to get this done? SamJohn2013 (talk) 18:31, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SamJohn2013(talk·contribs·deleted contribs·logs·filter log·block user·block log): I would certainly comment on such a report, not because I think Ser Amantio di Nicolao(talk·contribs·deleted contribs·logs·filter log·block user·block log) is wrong on all counts (he probably isn't), but because he doesn't seem to give it any consideration before he embarks on immense projects that modify thousands of articles. My problem, as noted above, is that he keeps moving articles into huge categories which are, best, relevant to him for reasons that he never seems to state (it's "complex"). I myself get as many of tens of articles a day in which he just adds generic categories using automated tools, even though I had taken the trouble of sorting out categories in some observable order. This I find quite annoying, and it makes editing here less fun than it should be. As you can see from the convo above, it never occurred to him to create the narrower category before, or together with, the larger ones, meaning that the work load he sets for other editors (and himself!) is potentially infinite. It is, in any case, indefinite.
I would suggest opening a request for comment here. I really think Ser can contribute a lot to wikipedia, but that would require some adaptation of his editing philosophy to something that actually makes sense. Dahn (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dahn: (See also the talk page for Orangemike.) Ser Amantio di Nicolao is completely out of control and must be stopped. What he is doing is not constructive editing, it is madness. He pays no attention to anyone, just continues on with his vandalism. Look at his contribs, all done by AWB, numbering in the THOUSANDS, and that is only going back a few days! He is doing irreparable, mindless damage to Wikipedia. I delete two or three of them and I take heat for tampering with content, or I am reprimanded because category deletes require consensus. Dizzy robots are eating holes the encyclopedia! Does anyone care? SamJohn2013 (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SamJohn2013:: I'm not sure I agree that all he does is unconstructive, but I must admit I'm not keen on being absorbed by the issue -- particularly since I do find fault with so many of his edits, and I frankly want to protect myself from wasting more time on it than on other projects. Please consider opening a request for comment, and substantiating your case with diffs which would show other editors precisely what you mean by "eating holes in the encyclopedia". I will add my comments there about the problems I have encountered, and surely, if you make your case and I make my case, editors will look into Ser's edit history and it might even result in a ban on his use of the automated tools, if there really is no other solution. My guess is that Ser is being misguided in some attempt to increase his edit count artificially, and whatever negative consequence this has had, it needs to be corrected -- I agree with you here. I am of the opinion that Ser can be a genuinely productive contributor once he switches focus from this... I won't call it disruption, but let's go with static. Regards, and please let me know if you take a step such as requesting for comment, so that I may add to it. Dahn (talk) 22:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dahn. I have just been reading your interesting biography of Marițica Bibescu. Your presentation is of a high standard, not just the well-drafted text but the illustrations and the detailed sourcing. It looks to me as if it could be submitted for GA review as it is. I see you have had a number of GA successes in the past -- so why not try for one more? There's just one last question in regard to the article: you say she wrote poetry but that none of it has been published. Do you happen to know if any of her poems have been preserved? It would be interesting to know, and even more interesting to see an example of what she wrote.--Ipigott (talk) 10:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ipigott: Hi and thank you. To answer your main question: I find the review process rather cumbersome and distracting, but I might give it a go. On the other issue: I had a glance at one source, by one author I already cited with another article, which mentions some things about her, but it was through google books and not entirely visible; also, it was the kind of e-book version where you don't get to see page numbers. I promised myself I would try and get the book in print, because it seems promising on this and other subjects. Anyway, that source has an attributed poem which is just a few lines long, in which she mocks both her husband and her brother-in-law, something along the lines of "dumbest Ghicas". It is in a really basic form, more of a chant or a folk song than a poem -- like the stuff her father used to write. For what that sounded like, you can check out that Frunză verde și-o lalea stanza from Eminescu which I rendered for the "In the arts" section -- it sounds more or less like a trademark Văcărescu poem, or like any poem from that stage of literary development (Eminescu was playing around, he could, and did, write much better stuff). Dahn (talk) 10:18, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I had already looked carefully at Frunză verde și-o lalea. Nevertheless, the statement that she had a "talent for writing poetry" implies that her work was of a fairly high standard. Glad to see you are contemplating GA. Not too many women's biographies make the grade but I am sure this one would encounter no major problems.--Ipigott (talk) 10:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but a high standard contextually, in a generally illiterate society, and where the literary language was just emerging. For instance this is what males in her family wrote a generation before, and they are still considered exceptional in their context (the pieces are not entirely bad, but the meter and vocabulary are what you find in a 90s pop song).
Thank you again. And thank you for reading it and liking it, this feedback is actually more of a reward for me than GA status. And if you do pick up any spelling or other mistakes, please don't hesitate to correct them. Dahn (talk) 10:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have long enjoyed your meticulously researched and well-written articles on historical persons, so this is long overdue. On the occasion of your work on Iacob Heraclid (a very interesting figure), allow me to give you this small token of appreciation for your excellent work. Please keep it up, Wikipedia needs contributors like you! Constantine ✍ 17:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cplakidas:: Thank you so much, Constantine, this is praise from Caesar. I also much appreciate your copyedits. And yes, this was probably the most incredible figure I ever wrote a piece on. Beyond the very basic facts of his life, there was so much more I was not aware of -- it seems that various authors have just focused on tidbits, some not even aware that there was more to write about, and I got the privilege to connect the pieces of this chaotic story. Dahn (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The
discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here
.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Whoever this is from: Please note that I have not edited (and will not edit) any version of the article, but simply discussed it on the talk page. The discussion with other editors has proven constructive, so this tag is really irrelevant to me. Dahn (talk) 21:16, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom specifically modified the previous wording from "articles" to "pages". Anyway, this is purely pro forma, as it states in the first line. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dahn - I did want to drop a short thank you. Mediation, on the talk-page, by less involved editors on the subject is helpful. While I might not come off that way on the TP when objecting to some of your suggestions (and I apologize if so), I think your steering is helpful. Thanks!Icewhiz (talk) 08:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Icewhiz: And thank you right back for being receptive of suggestions and criticism. If I may offer a piece of advice: please consider making the case for the position you disagree with, and accept that it will continue to exist, is not abhorrent, and will need to be cited in articles, at least once in a while. Simply calling out labels, more or less applicable, more or less relevant, makes it look like you're simply trying to poison the well. Not all Polish commentary is nationalist, and not all nationalism is extreme (and I'm not saying that as a nationalist, as I most certainly am not one). And using the Holocaust in a current political debate, to score political points against present-day people who (whatever their other sins) have no involvement with either the Holocaust or its denial, is probably one of the worst, most morally depressing, ideas people on the Left have ever had in recent years. Dahn (talk) 13:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive
G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:
tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.
As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.
The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.
The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.
Go ahead and edit the articles, you are bound to be more neutral than quite a few participants. And you are right, our criticism is not that relevant - if reliable sources don't say it, well... (plus NOTFORUM, but who cares, right? :D). One thing: because of the current Polish gov't politicization of the national media, I am afraid the difference between 'national radio' and 'right wing portals' is becoming slim. For years now, my parents have been calling the national TVP news program pl:gadzinówka... (hmmm, need to TL that to English :D). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:31, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nihil novi: Thank you, but I'm not sure I deserve such praise; most of the work on retrieving the scholarship has in fact been done by Icewhiz, once we moved from where the article was taking a stand in the polemic to where we all agreed that things are probably not as clear and Manichean as the hype would have us believe. He has been constructive and has actually contributed, all in all, the whole range of points of view expressed about Grabowski. (I also rarely contributed to articles about Poland, and rather few abut WW2.) Concerning the other issue: well, I'm at the level where I don't have an image of what other Polish sources are likely to have dealt with this; my advice is that you or other proficient Polish speakers conduct google searches with keywords and through domains that are likely to produce reliable and relevant results, and cite the sources -- for instance, what Polish academic journals have produced less-than-positive reviews, and on what grounds. My involvement with the article is only third-party and cannot possibly replicate that effort. Dahn (talk) 09:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nihil novi: - if you could translate/summarize - this (click on the image of the news clipping - it is all visible as an image) - by Dariusz Stola - it might be worthwhile to include.Icewhiz (talk) 09:18, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dariusz Stola's review of Jan Grabowski's Judenjagd (2011 first edition) includes some crucial information not previously considered in the "Jan Grabowski" article. Thank you! Nihil novi (talk) 13:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Leon Tomșa
On 7 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Leon Tomșa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Leon Tomșa, who passed laws limiting Greek immigration to Wallachia, was reportedly a Greek oyster-monger? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Leon Tomșa. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Leon Tomșa), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 19 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Iacob Heraclid, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that before taking over Moldavia in 1561, Iacob Heraclid(pictured) had been executed in effigy and staged his own death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Iacob Heraclid. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Iacob Heraclid), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 24 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Greeks in Malta, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Malta's Greek community once included slaves, as well as the privateers who captured them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Greeks in Malta. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Greeks in Malta), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Nici nu am scris că ar fi fost la Mărășești, ci că evenimentul în cauză era după bătălia de la Mărășești; prezența lui în zona Oituz este confirmată de sursa citată cu notă la finalul frazei. Articolele sunt interesante și foarte bine scrise. Dahn (talk) 04:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, există şi alte articole despre diverse alte subiecte, scrise şi mult mai bine decât atât, cu siguranţă (exemple: ro:Atacul de la Smârdan (pictură de Nicolae Grigorescu), ro:Mișu Popp, ro:Constantin Lecca, ro:Ștefan Luchian ...etc...). Foloseşte la ceva dacă semnalizez existenţa lor cuiva ? Întreb deoarece traducerea articolelor din engleză în română esteo activitate curentă, pe când traducerea articolelor care chiar ar merita din română în engleză şi postarea lor la en.wiki pare că este zero.Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 08:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cu regret, eu personal nu mă ocup cu traducerile, într-unul sau altul din sensuri -- găsesc activitatea de editare de la zero mult mai interesantă, și pentru că știu sigur ce spun sursele pe care le folosesc. Dacă mă răzgândesc, o să mă asigur c-o voi face integrând sugestiile de mai sus. Însă în orice caz mă bucur că wikipedia în română depășește nivelul execrabil la care a rămas nepermis de mult timp, și sunt încântat că se scrie pentru prima oară competent, cursiv, declișeizat, domol, ne-pășunist, pe subiecte cât se poate de interesante. Dahn (talk) 08:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Deși, totuși, mai avem exprimări cam pompoase, subiective și editoriale, de tipul: „ Prin extensia eronată a termenului, datorită aurei de glorie căpătată de dorobanți, numele lor l-a substituit pe cel al infanteriștilor care nu erau cu nimic mai prejos în acte de sacrificiu suprem sau de bravură.” Nu cred că e treaba utilizatorilor wikipedia să dea certificate de bravură soldaților de la 1877 -- ce e relevant în fraza aia poate fi rescris atribuind opinia către autorul ei. Dahn (talk) 08:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
De asmenea: „Edificiul social habsburgic, intrat în colaps odata cu revoluția din 1848 afișase până atunci o artă evazionistă, lipsită de vigoare și desprinsă de realitate, idilică și care dezvolta în exterior un optimism fals, plin de elemente convenționale.” Aceasta e o opinie care-i poate fi atribuită emitentului, Ion Frunzetti, ceea ce i-ar permite și cititorului să-și dea sema că e vorba de o frazeologie marxistă -- în caz că nu e deja clar din formaulrea despre cum arta bună nu poate fi decât „nedesprinsă de realitate”. Biedermeier n-o fi cine știe ce curent, dar e cât se poate de respectabil, și sunt autori care susțin că fără Biedermeier n-ar fi existat Eminescu. Nu e un fapt că arta austriacăm de pe la 1850 era idioată, deși da, o opinie în acest sens exprtimată de Frunzetti este citabilă, și mai ales atribuibilă. Ideea că „edificiul social habsburgic era în colaps la 1848” este de asemenea colorată în wishful thinking-ul retoricii marxiste -- edificiul social habsburgic era cât se poate de viguros și la 1867, și la 1881, și la 1914. Dahn (talk) 08:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, the main source in history-related articles seems to be a pompous teleological account of WWI written by a biologist. Agree that rowiki seems to be catching on with
Kirițescu is pretty much a standard account, though certainly not beyond reproach. He was not just a biologist, but a participant and a political figure; he was also the recipient of accolades from historians under several regimes, including communist. I myself think the work can be used profusely, especially for banal facts but also including for its editorial opinions, and of course challenged when there's a source challenging him -- just like we would for Duca or Alimănișteanu or various others. Dahn (talk) 11:53, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. As a matter of fact I think Kiritescu is no more reliable as a historian than Roller. Neither had trainig as a historian and both served primarily to legitimise the government discourse, distorting or omitting facts as needed. I would never use neither unattributed (or, better said, I would never use either at all, there are better sources representing the same POV). As for the other you mention, they are both usable for historical events as long as they are attributed (as are Marghiloman, Argetoianu and other high government figures). As for Kiritescu's use by the "communists", you're talking about the 80s, when the nationalist historiographical discourse was pretty much indistinguishable from the interwar (complete with condemning PCdR's stance as "anti-national"). I expect a major topic such as WWI to be well researched by actual historians (including nationalists ones such as Iorga, Nistor and Buzatu), precluding any need to use Kiritescu.Anonimu (talk) 15:18, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well in any case I haven't used him as a source myself, and probably won't; I'm ust arguing that him being used as a source is probably not much of a concern. But off-hand I think CK, Iorga and Nistor are all more reliable on any topic than Buzatu, whose professionalism is widely questioned. Dahn (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was not criticizing you, and I do expect Kiritescu do get things right on simple facts like dates, places, etc.; moreover, his interpretations of many of the events he describes may very well be the consensus view in “classical” Romanian historiography (though not necessarily elsewhere). I hope that if anyone decides to translate the linked articles in EnWP, he puts an effort into improving the referencing, which would include at the least finding a more reliable source than Kiritescu. Regarding Buzatu, I just mentioned it because the first linked article uses it as a source. I’m well aware of the issues with his writings, but, him being an actual historian, he may be usable on topics not related to Antonescu or Romanian Jews.Anonimu (talk) 20:28, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
În limba română există 3 surse fundamentale despre WWI:
Dabija, Gheorghe (general), Armata română în răsboiul mondial (1916-1918), vol.I-IV, Tipografia „Lupta” N. Stroilă, București, 1932-1936
Kirițescu, Constantin, Istoria războiului pentru întregirea României, vol. I-II, Editura Științifică și Enciclopedică, București, 1989
Ioanițiu, Alexandru (lt. col.), Războiul României (1916-1918), vol. I-II, „Tipografia Geniului”, București, 1932
Kiriţescu este parte a acestora. Cu siguranţă are păcatele lui, dar punctul său de vedere poate fi un bun reper de la care se poate porni. Din experienţa proprie, pot spune că cele spuse de el trebuiesc relativ frecvent verificate. Există de altfel referitor la WWI în prezent două proiecte: ro:Portal:România în Primul Război Mondial şi ro:Portal:Acțiunile militare postbelice (1918-1920). Primul este bine conturat în prezent, al doilea e la început. Ca principiu există şi o preocupare pentru a oferi o alegere pertinentă între diverse surse bibliografice de încredre. Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 09:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
De altfel, prin intermediul proiectului despre WWI activitatea de pe ro.wiki a primit şi o recunoaştere, cred eu binemeritată. Aş zice că lururile totuşi se mişcă un pic.Accipiter Q. Gentilis (talk) 09:13, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
May you kindly tell me what am I supposed to do then? If Google Maps is not good enough, if sites are not good enough, what exactly do you want from me to get the name of some streets? If you're going to criticize at least provide a solution. Torpilorul (talk) 05:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nowhere. The info isn't vital under any definition, and if nothing was published on that in a third-party source, we don't conduct our own research to publish it. If it was, then use the source. Dahn (talk) 06:00, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Gee thanks for the help. -_- Torpilorul (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Dahn (talk) 06:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
French Danube Army, but in reality it had less than 4,000? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Banat Republic. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Banat Republic), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SounderBruce 02:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
Orphaned non-free image File:Ion Negoiţescu.JPG
⚠
Thanks for uploading
claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
MX: Thank you! I'm touched by this message, and it's always wonderful to hear people picked up an interest in reading about these somewhat obscure topics by means of one's work. And yes, I might go for GA, but I'm in no rush. Dahn (talk) 17:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply
I see no need for the subtitles added as the lists are in date order, US style with month first. Consistency is important. So is correct typography. They unconsciously reassure readers that they're not reading amateur guesswork (which they usually aren't.) I may say it took about six months' work to achieve near-consistency of format and typography on these pages. You are coming rather late onto the scene. I'm also unclear what your criteria are for including pages. Hitherto most writers and one or two of the best works have been added. Printers, publishers and editors have not been consistently added. Bmcln1 (talk) 10:34, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you adding far more information about some years than others? Surely the years should offer similar ranges of information. Bmcln1 (talk) 10:41, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Bmcln1: The primary purpose of subsections is to help readers navigate. Instead on focusing on absolute consistency of format between the 499 small articles and the one article I'm currently expanding, you could for instance look up what they do for articles such as 2000. Of course there is no need for such changes in articles that have been expanded and where the content simply is managable -- this is why I did not do the same for 1563 in literature or 1658 in literature. As for inclusion criteria: the articles are on literary professionals (and yes, publishers as well as actors or illustrators, because they seem to have been included by consensus even before I ever edited a page in the series); any suggestion of culling by "importance" or whatnot, if that is what you're suggesting, would render these pages woefully POV. Dahn (talk) 10:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Why are you adding far more information about some years than others" Because that is my editing style, I would rather focus on individual years, and I usually start off when there's something significant in Romanian literature that can be included -- then add more detail on various other regions for the pleasure of it. Wikipedia, unless you don't know this already, is not consistent, and there is no real way of making it consistent just like that: this is why we have featured articles on obscure topics and stubs on more relevant ones. Dahn (talk) 10:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So if it's your editing style, it's correct? That's not the usual principle on Wikipedia.
Importance is difficult, I agree, but I don't think the answer is to include masses more. Your judgement in this respect is as good as mine. I also agree that some publishers, etc. crept in again, although they were cleaned out a couple of times. On a more positive note, I fully agree with internationalising, i. e. including "important" from Mexico, say. I fully agree that the 21st century pages get out of hand but I don't feel qualified to change them. Can we conclude this discussion somehow fairly quickly? Bmcln1 (talk) 10:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing about my editing style which conflicts with the principles of wikipedia. And please focus: ideally, all articles should be expanded and referenced much in the way I did; you agree with that, by and large, so suggesting that I should add more content to all articles to martch this one, or that I should remove content from this one, would be absurd and disingenuous proposals.
I am not including "masses more", though. I am performing searches for events, issues, biographies that are at least contextually important to national literature X, and I pick them up from quite top-shelf reference works, which generally is clue enough to their importance. For instance, I did not add the info about Carlyle's wedding (just properly referenced it); but I can argue that the introduction of printing to Madagascar/Liberia or Pushkin narrowly escaping a hanging are at least equally important events in that year. Rest assured, I would not content on [obscure Romanian writer] getting married, as I am sane enough to understand that seminal events in the lives of Carlyle or Pushkin or Eminescu are of more than relative importance. Dahn (talk) 11:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We can both focus on the end result here, though: what the reader gets is a panorama of literature in that year, with events and biographies outlines and intertwined in a way that no other reference work has provided so far. I can't promise we'll get that for all articles in the series, but surely it's a net gain even if it's just in some. Dahn (talk) 11:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Bmcln1: A small note on my editing style. I started expanding 1563 in literature after I had added a note on Heraclid's lynching. To me, an article that gave the reader this, but no info on what are much more important events of that year, simply looked bad, and so I started adding other facts. Modesty aside, I don't think there's anyone who can say they dislike the result, which is probably the most complete image of that literary year that's out there. Dahn (talk) 11:13, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your note on Heraclid's lynching is short, interesting and important. If the same can't be said of all you added, then put the extras on the linked page to the person or event concerned. This is a list of links, so clarity and relevance are important, but so is brevity, which makes things easy for readers to find. A grand account of all that happened in 1563 misses the point. I can see why you did it – you had the information and wanted to put it somewhere. So do you have any proposals? We can't go on discussing for ever. Other things to do on and off Wikipedia, sorry. Bmcln1 (talk) 11:51, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you get my point: I have explicitly noted that I do not want to have everything from the year 1563 listed on that page, but yes, an account of everything important in 1563 literature is clearly achievable; and this is why I don't plan on adding more to the 1563 article, as I have clearly expanded it to what its purpose should be. That said, I'm very interested t know what other notes you found excessive: some are longer than the note on Heraclid, but all the things mentioned in them are important enough, show links between individual biographies, and never does the whole thing cover more than a small paragraph. This was also established practice: for instance, what we did for the Normandy landing in 1944 in literature (unreferenced, btw!) is exactly what we now do for the Decembrist uprising (in 1826) or the French Wars of Religion (in 1563). Maybe you should consider carefully looking into the texts I've added instead of assuming I have no editorial standard and that I will add just about any nonsense. Dahn (talk) 11:59, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Milhist coordinator election voting has commenced
G'day everyone, voting for the 2018 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Note: the previous version omitted a link to the election page, therefore you are receiving this follow up message with a link to the election page to correct the previous version. We apologies for any inconvenience that this may have caused.[reply]
Have your say!
Hi everyone, just a quick reminder that voting for the WikiProject Military history coordinator election closes soon. You only have a day or so left to have your say about who should make up the coordination team for the next year. If you have already voted, thanks for participating! If you haven't and would like to, vote here before 23:59 UTC on 28 September. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 519 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!
boyar Emanoil Băleanu, which was seen as being fulfilled when his wife died in childbirth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Emanoil Băleanu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Emanoil Băleanu), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Great improvements on 'Otto Roth'; I just reviewed the article and was impressed at how you improved the article, keep it up! Regards, SshibumXZ (talk·contribs). 19:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SshibumXZ: Thanks, and: Glad you enjoyed it! Dahn (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Iacob Heraclid, and the Hospitaller role in the Battle of Verbia
I just had a look at two articles which you wrote: Iacob Heraclid and Battle of Verbia - well done! I was intrigued by the Maltese/Hospitaller connections to both articles, and I had never heard about them before. I changed the birth place in the Heraclid article from "Hospitaller Malta" to "Malta, Kingdom of Sicily", since in 1527 Malta was still part of the Sicilian kingdom (the Hospitallers arrived on the islands in 1530).
Regarding the Battle of Verbia, I find it a bit unusual that in 1561 the Hospitallers were meddling in Central European affairs since at the time they would have been preoccupied with the Ottoman threat to Malta itself (following the defeats at
@Xwejnusgozo: Hello. First off, you are absolutely right about his birthplace, and thank you for the fix. Also thanks for the kind, if surely undeserved, words of praise. On the other issue: it's a bit of a contentious topic; apparently, two Maltese historians are convinced that Heraclid acted as a vassal of Valette, but one Romanian scholar disputes this as wishful thinking (I've summarized that disagreement in the Heraclid bio). The military assistance they provided was probably in the form of paying for his mercenaries, which his army was mostly a motley crew of various nationalities; I don't find any source saying that the Hospitallers actually fought in the field of battle, though it may be. In any case, this effort involved some 2,000 people in all, and we know for a fact that most of them were Polish, German and Hungarian, and therefore supplied by other Heraclidean allies. To be sure, Moldavia had some strategic importance as it could keep the Ottomans busy from the rear, but it was also the back of the woods, with very small armies able to accomplish quite a lot, if only for a short while. So I personally don't think it's that important a detail in the history of the Order, or of Malta, though it is an interesting quirk for sure. One may find a place for it in the body of articles, and yes, I can I add to it if you want me to. Dahn (talk) 21:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dahn: Thanks for your reply. :) I agree that it's unlikely that Hospitaller knights actually fought in the battle (but there's always the possibility of a very small number of knights being involved), and I think that their paying some mercenaries was more likely, if they even had a role at all. Anyway, all this is speculation from my part since I'm not knowledgeable on the subject. The articles you wrote seem to be as neutral as possible giving all the different viewpoints. I will leave it up to you whether or not to include a mention in the main articles about the Order or not - you're definitely way more familiar with the subject than I am. All the best! --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 15:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Xwejnusgozo: Let me know if you're satisfied with the additions in both articles. I tried to keep them proportional to what's already in there, and hope I managed to not make them overfocused. Dahn (talk) 19:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dahn: Yes I think that both additions are appropriate. Thanks for adding these interesting anecdotes to the articles. :) Xwejnusgozo (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Xwejnusgozo: Excellent then. Thanks for the suggestion, the trust, and the feedback. Dahn (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Kunság
On 17 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kunság, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the population of Kunság(banner pictured) was "almost entirely wiped out" during the Ottoman occupation, before recovering through re-colonization? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kunság. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kunság), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hi. I saw you added a nice svg symbol for the Polish Bund. Are you certain regarding the colour scheme of the symbol? --Soman (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Soman (talk·contribs) Hi, always a pleasure to hear from you. Unfortunately no, but I used the same colors that are used by the Bund to this day in various combinations (as with the SKIF), and I think we can safely assume that at least one part of the symbol is red. I think it is an improvement from the greyscale, even though part of is an educated guess. I'm always open to suggestions. Dahn (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It looks great. Just one minor point. If you look at the greyscale version there is also a Polish-style quotation mark around the name. --Soman (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Soman: You are very right, and thank you. I've updated the image, but it may take a while to replace the old version (some browsers have an initial delay). Dahn (talk) 05:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Very good, thanks, --Soman (talk) 12:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your most recent revert of my edit and I don't think you fully understand the nature of the Romanian nationalist parties category. You see, that category was specifically created for parties that subscribe to Romanian nationalism regardless of country. This differentiates it from Category:Nationalist parties in Romania which is for all nationalist parties in Romania regardless of nationality. This is why I reverted your revert. Charles Essie (talk) 20:19, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have reverted myself. Dahn (talk) 20:32, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Referenced from a single author (the numbers in parentheses are the page numbers from the single book used to write the article), other sources I found are all by the same author. Does not meet
WP:GNG
.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be
deleted for any of several reasons
.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the
Er, Romania was never a colony? I mean, there was a condominium of European nations in charge for maybe 10 years, but most Romanians dont remember it at all, and those who do are universally happy with it. Maybe we count as a Russian or Ottoman colony, but both Russia and Turkey state (absurd) claims to being anti- and post-colonial states, so why would that count here? Dahn (talk) 20:44, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination for National Peasants' Party
I have asked questions at
WT:DYK for others to assist. Flibirigit (talk) 18:16, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
I reviewed it, and two paragraphs need a ref. Fine work, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Poate vă interesează...
Salut! Am remarcat harta dumneavoastră vectorială de la Commons făcută după Guillaume Lejean și aș dori să știu dacă vă interesează subiectul despre ceangăi. Eu unul mă documentez de mai mulți ani și mi-am transpus munca de cercetare la articolul în limba română (
Wikiproject Military history is running a project-wide edit-a-thon, Backlog Banzai. There are heaps of different areas you can work on, for which you claim points, and at the end of the month all sorts of whiz-bang awards will be handed out. Every player wins a prize! There is even a bit of friendly competition built in for those that like that sort of thing. Sign up now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/September 2019 Backlog Banzai to take part. For the coordinators, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:37, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikipedia and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.
On 11 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Max Auschnitt, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that billionaire Max Auschnitt bribed Romanian authorities, and worked with "an anti-Semite, but a civilized one", to help Jews escape the Holocaust? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Max Auschnitt. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Max Auschnitt), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election half-way mark
G'day everyone, the voting for the XIX Coordinator Tranche is at the halfway mark. The candidates have answered various questions, and you can check them out to see why they are running and decide whether you support them. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2018. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on UNITER requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 4meter4 (talk) 05:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Aristide Blank
On 25 September 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Aristide Blank, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a court in communist Romania found banker Aristide Blank guilty of high treason, based on his meetings with foreigners and notes from Blank's unpublished novel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aristide Blank. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Aristide Blank), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal!
With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.
I can see that he has knowledge of Romanian language and has made major edits in the biography of Prince Leon Tomșa (d. 1632) of the Wallachian country. Wouldn't you like to improve the biographies of other princes in the Wallachia and Moldavia, who are often (too) short in English? I'm a Hungarian person, but I am very interested in the history of these two neighboring medieval countries - but there is hardly any book in Hungarian. I don't know Romanian, a little English, and it would be nice to have a look at these prince biographies. Regards: 12akd (talk) 12:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@
Barbu Mărăcine and Hrizea of Bogdănei. I might do more in the future, as time and fatigue permit. Allow me to thank you for on interest in this, and to express my excitement that you found the Tomșa article interesting. Dahn (talk) 07:31, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply
]
Unfortunately, the history of Eastern European countries can be known to a minimal extent even today. While English / French / German / Italian history is the subject of a series of detailed summaries in almost all languages - the history of Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Poland and Russia is less well researched (up to the 20th century). The reason for this is obviously the strong central view of Western Europe, although Eastern European history is at least as interesting and instructive. for example, I know only one more detailed book on medieval Romanian history: a 19th century book by Pál Hunfalvy (1810-1891). The synthesis of the 20th century linguist-historian is not very accurate: The History of the Romans (2 volumes), Budapest, 1894 (positivist work) [2]. The newer books in Hungarian / translated into Hungarian deal only extensively with the main parts of Romanian history before the 1862 unification (about one book of 400 pages in 50 pages, the rest from the end of the 19th century + the 20th century).
And even in these medieval / early modern part, almost only of the Wallachian princes, Old Mircea (+1418), Vlad III (+1476). Neagoe Basarab (+1521) and Mihály Vitéz (+1600) - in the Moldavian part Bogdan I (+1365), Alexander I. (+1432). Stefan III (+1504), Petru Rares (+1546) are named. Between 1600 and 1862, almost no one is mentioned by name (perhaps Vasile Lupu and Dimitrie Cantemir), only they refer to Turkish rule, and since the 1700s, the two rulers ruled the Fanariota Greeks. Yet these princes, in their time, ruled over hundreds of thousands of people, levied taxes, made laws, and ruled countries. And yet they were forgotten ... 12akd (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I could not agree more, and have sought to remedy the void here precisely based on this rationale. Unfortunately, I am bound by time and by energy. Will do more, however, over the coming weeks, months, and years. Dahn (talk) 09:33, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck! Thanks! 12akd (talk) 10:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You know much more about him than I do. I only have a minor question. The Romanian Wikipedia indicates that his first name was Baruch and indicates of reference which I was not able to check. Your article mentions the name Avram. Maybe you could be so kind and check whatever you can and then correct either the English or Romanian Wikipedia. Both information cannot simultaneously be correct. Afil (talk) 06:42, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there. All I know is what the one source which goes into that level of detail from the ones I used says, and I cannot vouch about whether it is ultimately correct, nor about the text on rowiki. Dahn (talk) 21:38, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I added a question about the so-called "Szekely" elements on the talk page of the Transylvanian Coat of Arms page, maybe you could take a look? Thanks. DalbozDuncanthrax (talk) 00:55, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They aren't "so-called" ... they are CALLED - by every valid historian and linguist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.1.232 (talk) 17:15, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
March Madness 2020
G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team[reply]
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --evrik(talk) 04:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply
On 18 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nikita Salogor, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Moldavian leader Nikita Salogor called for an expansion of the borders of Soviet Moldavia in 1946, which may have led to his removal from office later that year? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nikita Salogor. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Nikita Salogor), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
nominate
) 07:07, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Khotin Uprising
On
Khotin Uprising were told to wear the winter clothes of suspects whom they executed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Khotin Uprising. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Khotin Uprising), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
super fain topicul cu Radu Paisie. felicitari! LicaVlahul (talk) 14:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Slavery in Romania
Hi. If you have some time please take a look at the talk page. Compelling evidence exists that the slave auction poster featured in Ian Hancock's book is a forgery (see Dan Ungureanu's article). The credibility of what is otherwise a good article is damaged by this. Plinul cel tanar (talk) 17:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Plinul cel tanar: Hi. I have no objection the poster being removed, but I will note in passing that Ungureanu's article is more of a self-published essay, and should therefore not be used for decision-making steps. Dahn (talk) 00:20, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dahn. As you wrote the very comprehensive 1946 Romanian general election article, I wonder whether you might be able to help with a (hopefully quick) query. I am trying to identify the first women MPs in Romania (for a list I am compiling of all the first women MPs in different countries). According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (which has not always been correct on the subject for other countries), 22 women were elected to Parliament in this election. However, I cannot find a list of names anywhere. Is there any chance you could point me in the right direction. Cheers, Number57 15:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Number 57: Hi. Unfortunately, I am not aware of any such comprehensive list, though I know two or three names: Constanța Crăciun, Ella Negruzzi, and Mara Lazăr. I will keep an eye out, tho. Dahn (talk) 01:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thank you! Number57 17:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Check page 4 here (the article starting "18 no parlamenti"="18 women MPs"). I was able double check the names in another source, though there is one missing here: Szűcs Margit from the MNSz. 19 seems to be the correct total, however it is possible it may have increased after the opening of the Parliament through seat shuffling.Anonimu (talk) 21:39, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonimu: Superb – thank you very much. The missing one seems to be from the Social Democratic Party – it states there were seven but then only lists six. Any idea who the missing one may be? I notice Ella Negruzzi is not in that list. Number57 11:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
They skipped Maria Tonciulescu for the SDP. No idea about Ella Negruzzi. She didn't get a seat in the first instance, maybe another MP on her party list left her his seat (though I doubt it, the PNT only briefly participated in the Parliament sessions). Maybe Dahn has more info.Anonimu (talk) 12:40, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonimu: Thanks – do you have a source that includes Tonciulescu in the list? Cheers, Number57 15:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
She's listed with a SDP seat for Ilfov at here. For Szucs see table at the end of document 48 in this book. Both are also listed along the others in a (not extremely reliable) list of deputies I've got, but I'm not sure I also have the title page to get you a proper ref.Anonimu (talk) 17:12, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not vandalism
Hi Dahn, this was not vandalism; you can compare with what included on History of Malta. The most modern Maltese historiography (Wettinger, etc) recognise there there was no Byzantine continuity on the islands. Cheers, --Dans (talk) 11:09, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dans: Hi. As you can see, this notion is explicitly contradicted by the body of text, which quotes sources suggesting that the island was not just (scantly) populated, but that there were some Greek survivors; it's also quite implausible that the archipelago was entirely depopulated. I will not allow the lead to contradict the article based on what other articles may or may not say, but rather I would recommend those other articles and sources to be checked for what they actually say, and other sources be brought in there to state that there may be more to the story. Dahn (talk) 09:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Luttrell, who I have used there, and who was published in 1994 (i.e. not in the premodern era, but less than 30 years ago), agrees that there was no Byzantine continuity, and indeed most historians agree with this. However, they frame this in cultural terms, not "racial" ones: as the article says, no part of the population was culturally Greek, because the process was one of complete Islamization. In that sense, there is in fact no contradiction. Dahn (talk) 09:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject Newcomer and Historian of the Year awards now open
G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk! 16:34, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Aristide Blank
I can hardly understand your revert. The article states that Culoglu was Aristide's father in law. Can you find any explanation how this can be possible if he was not married to Culoglu's daughter? Afil (talk) 23:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is a limit to what is acceptable. I am very rarely contributing to Wikipedia, just because of your excessive policing. Incidentally, I knew the Blank family, before they left Romania. But, of course, any personal information is not acceptable, according to you. The civilized reaction on this issue would have been, if you were so rigid minded, to indicate "citation needed" not to delete the information. But I have had enough. You don't want my contributions to wikiepdia. I don't mind. You are perfectly aware that I publish in books the important information I want to convey to the public. Afil (talk) 23:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I dont like citation needed tags, and I dont view it as a good approach to tag a researched article for a factoid that the person adding it manifestly hasn't researched, and goes on a "trust me" basis. The thing I took issue with was that (please focus) the source I had added on the Culoglu marriage did not specify her name -- as that stood, she couldve been named Smaranda or Athena or Leana or whatever. But heres the thing: I have looked for a source with her name spelled out, it turns out that such a source exists, and have added the info in the body of text myself -- using that source, a reliable one, and not some nonsense site.
"You are perfectly aware that I publish in books the important information I want to convey to the public." -- no, I was not, and it doesnt make any difference whatsoever that you do. Dahn (talk) 07:54, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see, from Commons, that you have some involvement in deciding that the map of the Russian Empire should include "spheres of influence". Can you please explain those spheres (or that influence) in the article, Russian Empire? Thanks. —GoldRingChip 20:19, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@GoldRingChip: Hi there. My involvement with the topic was marginal, and involved a small detail on a map that has since been corrected. Im not sure Im the best person to ask about this, but, since the map included a rendition of the spheres of influence, I weighed in about the definition being applied to Wallachia and Moldavia as Russian protectorates (under Regulamentul Organic). Im not sure how the term would apply to other areas, though. Dahn (talk) 21:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Protochronism and was hoping to have your input. Best, Plinul cel tanar (talk) 16:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks
Thanks for the feedback on
Protochronism. I've been busy working on the history section of the Romanian Orthodox Church - should you find the time I would also like to know you thoughts on that. Plinul cel tanar (talk) 14:40, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply
You reverted my edit in Grigore Sturdza to replace an EB1911 citation with a Wikisouce link. You query whether there are mandatory formats for citing EB1911. The brief answer is that there aren't, but Wiki has put much time and effort into making EB1911 (and other old encyclopaedias) more easily accessible via Wikilinks - see Wikipedia:WikiProject Encyclopaedia Britannica. In particular editors are encouraged to use Cite EB1911, as explained here: {{Cite EB1911}}.
I will in future quote these links when I make similar replacements to the one for Grigore Sturdza. Might I encourage you now to adopt the Wikisource link provided in my edit; amended as you see fit. Thankyou.ArbieP (talk) 15:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ArbieP In short, no. It is common courtesy that, since I massively expanded the article, you should respect the choice of formats, and not leave one reference formatted to your preference. Dahn (talk) 22:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dahn. You refer to courtesy and respect and also to consistency of formatting. The amount of time and effort you have put in to editing this article (and others) is commendable and indeed worthy of much respect and thanks. On the issue of consistency of formatting for citations, Wiki prefers all users to use Wikilinks for EB1911 citations, rather than for users to seek consistency of formatting within an article instead. It's not mandatory but it is established as Wiki's preference, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Encyclopaedia Britannica. ArbieP (talk) 09:10, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Gheorghe Chițu
On 27 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gheorghe Chițu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that, while drunk, Romanian government minister Gheorghe Chițu allegedly had a dentist "pull out the roots of all his molars and his front teeth", resulting in permanent neurological damage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gheorghe Chițu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gheorghe Chițu), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Grigore Sturdza and the unification of Bulgaria and Romania
Hi Dahn, I noticed there's a source mentioning Sturdza supported a Bulgarian-Romanian union in his article and I was wondering if there was some other extra info about the union that I could add to its article. I spent quite a lot of time searching for sources to make sure I didn't miss anything but I didn't see that one. SuperΨDro 13:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Super Dromaeosaurus: Hi there. There isnt much more to tell about Sturdzas alleged involvement with this project -- just the passing mention in a newspaper. There may be more on the project itself in other print sources Ive used at various junctions, and I can keep an eye out for that. If you want me to parse the info about Sturdza into the exquisite article youve created, let me know, and Ill fit it in. Dahn (talk) 05:08, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will be grateful if you keep an eye into other sources that may mention it, but I think it is not necessary to include that of Sturdza's article just to mention that he also supported the project, I wanted to see if there was some extra info of relevance. Thank you for the reply, let me know if you find anything. SuperΨDro 09:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. Dahn (talk) 10:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced
claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media
Hi Dahn, I was hoping you might advise me on a small matter. Following my recent edits on topics somewhat connected to the Romanian far-right an account was created with the apparent purpose of disrupting my edits by sending "subtle" messages [3]. Should I report it? Plinul cel tanar (talk) 07:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Yes, I think this should be reported. Dahn (talk) 08:07, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users
are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
Survey about History on Wikipedia
I am Petros Apostolopoulos, a Ph.D. candidate in Public History at North Carolina State University. My Ph.D. project examines how historical knowledge is produced on Wikipedia. You must be 18 years of age or older, reside in the United States to participate in this study. If you are interested in participating in my research study by offering your own experience of writing about history on Wikipedia, you can click on this link https://ncsu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9z4wmR1cIp0qBH8. There are minimal risks involved in this research.
If you have any questions, please let me know. Petros Apostolopoulos, [email protected]Apolo1991 (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Caloian
On 21 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Caloian, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Caloian, a ritual once practiced in southern and eastern Romania, involved the burial of a figurine (example pictured) by young girls, one of whom acted as a priest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Caloian. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Caloian), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 31 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Teodor Boldur-Lățescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Moldavian rebel Teodor Boldur-Lățescu was twice beaten up on circus grounds: once for insulting Wallachian officers of the Romanian Army, and a second time for cruelty to animals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Teodor Boldur-Lățescu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Teodor Boldur-Lățescu), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 00:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
centimeters-wide (10-inch) sleeping area? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gheorghe Eminescu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gheorghe Eminescu), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. My expert for Romanian topics! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, Gerda! Dahn (talk) 06:32, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 11 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gheorghe Pintilie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gheorghe Pintilie(pictured), who joined the Romanian Communist Party Central Committee on this day in 1948, had used a crowbar to murder its former general secretary? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gheorghe Pintilie. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gheorghe Pintilie), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Correction to previous election announcement
Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 20 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article I. C. Vissarion, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that writer I. C. Vissarion was sentenced to death during the 1907 Romanian peasants' revolt, after it was alleged that he had created homemade bombs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/I. C. Vissarion. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, I. C. Vissarion), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Dahn, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—Moops⋠T⋡ 03:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!
Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 20:36, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Dimitrie Stelaru
On 17 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dimitrie Stelaru, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian poet Dimitrie Stelaru said that he once traveled to Paris by truck, adding "I hardly remember anything, I was drunk the whole time"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dimitrie Stelaru. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dimitrie Stelaru), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
good article for a general readership. Thank you! czar 05:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
DYK for Gogu Rădulescu
On 24 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gogu Rădulescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gogu Rădulescu, a member of the Romanian Communist Party central committee, was allegedly spied on by his colleagues through Lăutari performers, called upon to "sing him the blues"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gogu Rădulescu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gogu Rădulescu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 25 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dumitru Petrescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Soviet-trained commissar Dumitru Petrescu supervised propaganda (example pictured) aimed at purging a "nest of reactionaries" out of the Romanian Army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dumitru Petrescu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dumitru Petrescu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello! I just want to know. Do you plan on nominating Ilie Cătărău to DYK? Since it's been made into a GA you have the ability to do so. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I guess it would be nice (I thought it had already on DYK as a new article, but apparently I was wrong). If you are asking this because you wish to submit a nomination ahead of me, please do. If not, I might get around to doing it tomorrow. Dahn (talk) 22:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dahn! I admire the scientific depth of your articles. You are doing a really great job! Your article on Ioan Caragea is amazing! I wrote a few articles on other members of the Caragea family myself but I am pretty unexperienced regarding markdown and my historic sources are very limited. Please feel free to revise and/or add content to my articles. You are more than welcomed to do so! All the best and many thanks! F3625 (talk) 14:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, and many many thanks! Yours are very fine articles, and I just might give one or two of them an expansion if I get the chance. Dahn (talk) 05:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Tomobe03: Hi. I'm not as involved with the GAN process as to propose articles myself, but I would have no objection to it being nominated, and would lend a hand with addressing issues as time permits. Dahn (talk) 13:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:36, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Hi
Just wanted to thank you, as you write such extensive articles on neglected topics. Let me think which barnstar will be the most appropriate one... BorgQueen (talk) 01:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BorgQueen Hey, and thank you right back! Neglected topics are the best. Dahn (talk) 04:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Image source
As for File:Licurici 1948-05-01.png, did you scan it yourself, or did you find it somewhere on the net...? It's going to get featured on MP so we have to be very sure of the source. BorgQueen (talk) 11:17, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BorgQueen: See here for one source of the image. (I used this one and enhanced it a bit, but other sources of that image exist as well. In any case, each and every reproduction is in the PD, along with the source.) Dahn (talk) 11:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Omg. You "enhanced" it a bit too much lol. You know what, I'll restore this image myself and upload to Commons so we can use it instead. Cool? BorgQueen (talk) 11:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BorgQueen You can actually upload it on top of mine, I wouldnt mind. Dahn (talk) 11:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The picture quality is really horrible. I guess that's the only available image of him? BorgQueen (talk) 08:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BorgQueen Yes. We're also dependent on the scan quality through the Cluj Library version (I didn't bother adding the link in the image source, as that issue of Cruciada may in theory be picked up elsewhere, and links tend to rot unless archived). There might be another image of him in Aurel Sasu's (in fact Mircea Zaciu's) biographical dictionary of literature, but I'm missing the volume for the letter C. I actually congratulate myself for finding an image of him, it seems he was right nearly forgotten -- and probably tried his best to make himself forgotten, given his changing political allegiances and the risk that he would end up in a communist jail had someone found him pictured in Cruciada. Dahn (talk) 08:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And yes, we do know that he is he same Vladimir Cavarnali of Bolgrad who is pictured there, because for instance this source independently mentions his contributions in Cruciada. Dahn (talk) 08:49, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Biruitorul Do you happen to have Sasu's volume with the C entries? Dahn (talk) 08:45, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BorgQueen He was kind enough to send me a pdf of the Sasu volume and no, no image. Dahn (talk) 09:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 1 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Vladimir Cavarnali, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Vladimir Cavarnali, who edited a communist children's magazine (cover pictured), had previously been a member of the fascist Crusade of Romanianism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Vladimir Cavarnali. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Vladimir Cavarnali), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 2 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article N. Porsenna, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that N. Porsenna, who translated The Ballad of Reading Gaol into Romanian, spent seven years in communist prisons? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/N. Porsenna. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, N. Porsenna), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I've noticed that many of the Romanian writers and intellectuals you write about are buried in Bellu Cemetery. Which is not surprising, since it's the largest cemetery in Bucharest according to our article. I was wondering if you would improve the cemetery article at some point? BorgQueen (talk) 22:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At some point, perhaps. The place is not that interesting on its own -- more of a hodgepodge, fit-them-all-in burial ground for a fit-them-all-in city. I do have one or two monographs that deal with it, but, like or article, they're mostly lists of people buried there. It doesn't really have a unitary history of its own, which makes writing about it a bit tedious. Dahn (talk) 09:17, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 8 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anton Novakov, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bessarabian legislator Anton Novakov, who was absent when his colleagues voted on union with Romania, sued the Romanian state for land benefits they had received for voting in favor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anton Novakov. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Anton Novakov), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 9 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Constantin Bivol, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Constantin Bivol, who championed land reform in Bessarabia, could only locate half of his ten dessiatins of ancestral farmland, noting that "God only knows where the rest of them are"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Constantin Bivol. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Constantin Bivol), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 11 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dumitru Topciu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Gagauz politician Dumitru Topciu was mocked by his colleagues in the Romanian Assembly of Deputies for speaking Romanian with a "boorish accent"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dumitru Topciu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dumitru Topciu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thanks for your great work on the above and the other recent DYK's - is there any significance to them coming out in early May or just coincidence? ITBF (talk) 04:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ITBF: Thank you for the kind words, and I'm glad you enjoyed them. Not any significance, alas; just that I had some time to work on them in March--April, figured out they'd make nice hooks, and the DYK crew decided to feature them rather close to each other. Dahn (talk) 04:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for D. I. Suchianu
On 25 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article D. I. Suchianu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that film critic and censor D. I. Suchianu wanted Romanian moviegoers to cease "falling asleep whenever they're not shown a naked breast [or] a hip that's getting some action"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/D. I. Suchianu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, D. I. Suchianu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 15 June 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dmitrii Milev, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the death records of Dmitrii Milev, a Soviet Moldavian writer, were falsified to obscure mention of his execution during the Great Purge? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dmitrii Milev. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dmitrii Milev), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
@Gerda Arendt: You are very welcome, and thank you for writing it! Dahn (talk) 14:56, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! - Now we have the next Romanian composer, and someone even nominated him for Recent deaths. I won't have time until tomorrow: Valentin Gheorghiu. First goal should be to get rid of the tags. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Women in Red
Hi there, Dahn, and thanks for creating such an interesting biography of
Wikipedia Women in Red where we are trying to chip away at the gender gap. If you are interested, you can sign up under "New registrations" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/New members. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 13:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
@Ipigott: Hi and thank you for the invite. I will have to decline, for several reasons: one is that the project looks more like a list of chores than something I would have fun with; another is that I do not agree to the project's ideological scope, which, I noted in several instances, lowers the bar of notability under an assumption that I find rather clumsy, and unfalsifiable ("women X and Y don't get that much coverage, so let's pretend like they deserve our coverage"). To your other point: the history of places such as Romania is overwhelmingly masculine for intrinsic reasons -- I do not condone them, I just note them. One is that all Romanians entered literate culture quite late, and only through their leaders -- this means that few Romanians were even historically visible, at all, and even fewer of them were women (generally in their ancillary roles, such as being the wife of a prince). The exceptions to this are few and far between -- Elena Năsturel is one example. When women did start contributing as intellectuals, in the modern era, it was often a self-referential or circular contribution, such as a feminist polemic (consider Sofia Nădejde, a very trite subject by my standards: it is simply not fun to write about, it produces the same stereotyped phrases, it makes me research the minutiae of a person's career in a boring setting). What this boils down to is that the handful of articles I've written are probably in the ballpark of just how many articles there would be, proportional to men's. I presume things can change from here on, but we should not expect that we can change the past, the what was. That said, with no commitment to any such project, I do have some articles on significant women planned -- not sure when I'll get to writing them. Dahn (talk) 23:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, Dahn, for your reasoned response. As for looking like a list of chores, many of us find the project fun and rewarding. You may well be right that some members try to justify the inclusion of women who are not really notable but by and large I believe the project reflects general standards of acceptability and assessment. You are obviously very well acquainted with women's roles in the history of Romania and Romanian-speaking regions but thanks to recent scholarship details of the lives and achievements of "unknown" women are slowly beginning to emerge. As a result we now have detailed articles on individuals such as Adele Zay and Anca Giurchescu, although both of these may have emerged as a result of their activities outside of Romania. I'm really pleased to see you have plans to write about a few more Romanian women yourself and look forward to reading them when they appear. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 06:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, very cool
Wikipedia is so fortunate to have a super duper smart person like yourself policing images (aside from that fact that you think Peter is Paul). TriplePowered (talk) 18:28, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 16 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Rallou Karatza, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Princess Rallou Karatza's theater in Bucharest, now upheld as a pioneering institution of modern Greek drama, was described in one Wallachian chronicle as a "temple" for devil-worship? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Rallou Karatza. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Rallou Karatza), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 26 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cornel Țăranu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian musicologistCornel Țăranu completed unfinished scores by George Enescu that Enescu did not wish to publish? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cornel Țăranu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cornel Țăranu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you for all you put in! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:22, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do think of nominating "him" for GA? Could you perhaps expand the lead for Enescu? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Gerda, for nearly skipping over your lovely message; it came at a time when I couldn't respond and then, like the jackass that I am, I forgot to respond. Than you for extending the credits to me, and for putting together much of the article. I'm not going to get into Enescu, as it would be too absorbing and I personally find him rather uninteresting (he was the object of such a cult in my lifetime that I don't think I would be discovering much about him, and that takes much pleasure out of writing it). But I might, at some point, provide some additional detail from some additional sources. Dahn (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have the follow-through for GA nominations, but if you do, sure, why not? Dahn (talk) 19:26, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll think about it, - not now ;) - For Enescu, it's just about expanding the lead from the information that he was a composer, - which - I think is really too little. (I hate these tags.) I went to his museum in Bucharest, and there was a young woman playing violin in a small hall - rehearsing perhaps - and played Bach. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:10, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as much as I despise the tags myself, the issue with Enescu is hat the article itself does not cover the scope of his activity, which the lead is supposed to summarize -- to expand the lead (properly, and without risking of those idiotic tags), one would have to expand the text as well, so that the info appears in both. A rather sizable bunch of any expanded bio should cover his being wined and dined by the communists, something which is still the topic of controversy. Dahn (talk) 20:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I understand that better now, thank you! - My story today - a first - isn't about an article by me, but one I reviewed for DYK, see here. I like all: topic, "hook", connected article (a GA on its way towards FA), image and the music "in the background". I just returned from a weekend with two weddings, so also like the spirit ;) - Pics to come, I promise one cake, the other was too large! Good music, and better even in the concert ending the second day, - Goldberg Variations theme for an encore, after Dohnányi Serenade! - Would you have anything to add/correct to Mariana Sîrbu? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Romanian violinist is now on the Main page, with a pic added to the article even, but we have no idea about when she was born. She kept it a good secret ;) - Anything in Romanian? She left in the 1970s, so perhaps was forgotten intentionally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay, Gerda, I was caught up in the Phanariote century. I'll have a look. Dahn (talk) 09:07, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda, the only reference regarding her childhood and adolescence is from an article in Clopotul of Botoșani, where she was giving a recital in July 1969. It says that she had graduated high school and was still "very young". Dahn (talk) 09:17, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking. I guess "studied" is not what it would mean in German: after graduation from high school ;) - In 1967, she was first violinist in a quartet, and the cellist was her (future?) husband. I guess we just leave it open then, especially if that is what she wanted. I recently received a furious email from a soprano whose year of birth (found in a Record company's entry, so open to all) I had written into her article ;) - Place of death is another mystery. - Any record of what she/they played back then? A review would add even more life. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think what the source means is that she was still in high school when she first performed, and doesn't go into whatever else she studied before 1969. (I was not aware of these vanity issues that classical musicians have, though your story takes me back to when I was puzzled as a kid that whale-sized tenors would dye their hair and redden their cheeks to "pass" for teenagers in various roles. I guess it's one of those businesses where age really matters.)
There are plenty of records on her but it's just... I'm not very interested in the topic. I might add a couple of sources, but not quite yet. Dahn (talk) 09:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity ;) - well, she has attention now, so how about adding one source for her early days. Several would be undue weight almost. I'd love to break up those horrible laundry lists of famous places, and countries which tell us nothing, and from the latest source I found (Leipzig, - was a dead link in English but today I looked at German, and they had it archived!) I could add a list of famous people, but all these don't make music. Did you listen to her playing Mozart with husband and daughter? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gerda: Well, okay, I'll try to add a few to balance the text in that way. If I may offer some advice: if you work with online sources (as in: exclusively online ones), consider archiving them as you go, and linking directly to the archive. (I haven't listened to her at all, alas. I think this is the first time I've even heard of her.) Dahn (talk) 11:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What you added is terrific, just the sort of thing it needed! - Archiving: probably a good idea, only: the links to the archive take much longer for me, and so far I wanted to spare readers that waiting time. - Same for me: never heard of her until I saw her name in the Recent deaths, where I look for Germans, musicians, women. The Mozart yt is at the end of the article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why no link to a composer when the piece has an article? Less blue, - a convention of classical music and opera. People who really don't know who Mendelssohn was can be sure to find a link in his violin concerto. Compare any quality article, - Jessye Norman comes to mind first, also Valentin Gheorghiu, and the violinist's recording section. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am happy about the people who looked at her article yesterday, now that it is much better. Please consider: in the lead for a violinist, we need no education about a composer's given names (unless umbiguous), and we really don't need a link for people as famous as Mendelssohn when it's ot about him but the piece. The composer's name could be dropped entirely if it was a unique name. I have been called pedantic for saying Verdi's Aida instead of just Aida. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We both appear to be editing the page To rob Peter to pay Paul. I edited it to ask for a citation, and you edited it and added the comment 'Oh for Christ'.
But I still don't see any quote by Kipling that says there should be a catechism of Conservative Central Office. Do you have any quotation for this 'catechism'? FieldOfWheat (talk) 18:01, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have answered on the talk page there, regardless of how ridiculous your query is. Dahn (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What an arrogant idiot you are. FieldOfWheat (talk) 19:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Radu Golescu
On 29 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Radu Golescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Wallachian statesman Radu Golescu, who worked with Russian occupiers in 1806, was described as "immeasurably thirsty for wealth, and mean-spirited"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Radu Golescu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Radu Golescu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hi Dahn, thank you for creating an article on Djuvara. I saw you added to the article two opposite categories, "Pro-Greek Aromanians" and "Pro-Romanian Aromanians". In Aromanian history and historiography identity debates about whether the Aromanians are Greeks or Romanians are and have been common, with it having involved many Aromanian figures. As a result I created those categories, the first being for Aromanians identifying as Greek or as a Greek subgroup and the second for the same but with the Romanians instead. It confused me to see both categories being included in the article because they're opposite views. Was this a misunderstanding or is there a reason? Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 23:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I believe the categories should also cover political stances less intense than "all Aromanians are Greeks/Romanians" -- there is no inherent reason why someone who rooted for the Eteria, and then deserted it for Vladimirescu, would not be included in either/both categories. This also establishes the prehistory of the very irreconcilable stances which emerged later in history. The reason for one article to feature in both is of course chronology: he was x, then he was y. (Consider: "communist, then fascist", as with Jacques Doriot; "fascist, then communist", as with Costin Murgescu). Dahn (talk) 00:06, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A "pro-Greek/Romanian Aromanian" is a kind of already defined term in academia, associated with ethnic identification. You can see fragments of academic articles here, many use these terms in the context of ethnicity and identity [4][5]. Thede Kahl explained it well: "Most common streams of national orientation among Aromanians were and are pro-Greek and pro-Romanian. The Greek-Romanian conflict on the so called "Aromanian question" split the Aromanians into different factions, i.e. those who consider themselves as being Romanian, those who consider themselves as being Greek and those who consider themselves as being Aromanian. It is pretty much already a convention in the academic niche related to the Aromanians to use these terms for ethnic identification.
Besides, I think lowering the threshold to political affiliation/orientation would be a mistake, since we would end up with quite broad categories. Most Aromanians live/have lived in Greece and Romania has been and practically still is a (the) hotbed providing relevant Aromanian figures, so we could classify most Aromanians in Wikipedia in one of the two categories because we will easily be able to prove that they must have had some kind of animosity to one of the two countries given their actions in their lifetime. Based in ethnic identification, as it was so far, the threshold is higher; every other article on those categories either as a quote of the person saying "I think all Aromanians are Greeks/Romanians" or an author saying "X thought Aromanians are Greeks/Romanians". It might look a little intense from the outside but it's a common debate within Aromanian thinking.
I'm not sure anyway that ethnicity and political affiliation to a given country is an acceptable combination for categories in Wikipedia. Theoretically we could apply the same model to a people as cosmopolitan as the Jews: imagine the number of categories we would have, Category:Pro-American Jews, Category:Pro-Russian Jews, pro Category:Pro-Czech Jews...
Is there any alternate category that we could use for the purpose of political affiliation? Even if not existing yet. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 08:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Most of what I put in for categorizing is a proposal with proposal qualities, Super Dromaeosaurus, so you don't need to be very persuasive on these points -- if you feel strongly about it, remove both categories, I will not oppose it. However, please let me sketch out some minor points that may or may not adjust your perspective to the same one I had when I made the judgment call. You see, in this particular case, while we don't know, and may never know, if the (half-literate) Serdar ever framed his Aromanianness as more Greek than Romanian, or more Romanian than Greek, his activity includes clear affiliations with both Greek nationalism (the Eteria) and Romanian nationalism (Vladimirescu's movement -- see in particular the part where he left the Eterists stranded at Drăgășani, outraged by one particular event). While these are more diffuse than actually joining a society with the explicit slogan "Aromanians are X", they may in fact validate his inclusion in both categories. This isn't lowering the threshold by much (just moving it back some 30 years before the age you had in mind when designing the categories), and it applies to only a handful of cases in that early period -- with Constantin Caracaș as another, more clear, example of a pro-Romanian Aromanian in the 1820s. This is because Romanian nationalism only emerged at earliest in the 1770s, became a mass phenomenon only in the 1820s, and because very few Aromanians were even aware of this back then. I'm not introducing a slippery slope whereby we divide all Aromanians into căprării, I just propose adding the more diffuse margins of the category in with the solid core. Dahn (talk) 08:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also: I am already very much aware of the controversy per Kahl and what you intended with the categories. Please note how I frame my take on the issue, and why it does not contradict you on this point. Crucially: Djuvara had to pick between two nationalisms, not just between identities, and he picked both, in succession. Dahn (talk) 08:52, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for explaining your logic. I now see we have similar interpretations of the category's purpose. Your interpretation would be that for example "Pro-Romanian Aromanians" would include any kind of Aromanian figures that engaged with the idea of Romanian nationalism, including the more intense subset that directly declared themselves as Romanians. The same would be the case with the pro-Greek category, thus justifying inclusion of Filiki Eteria members and troops of Vladimirescu. My interpretation would include only this latter more closed subset of people strictly identifying either as Greeks or as Romanians (which by the way theorically could include any figure centuries before the rise of nationalism, even if no such case has a Wikipedia page yet).
I'd still like to argue in favor of my own interpretation. The two terms are commonly used for figures such as teachers assigned by Romania in the Balkans or priests and fighters aided by Greece, all of whom were intended to influence the Aromanian population so that they felt more favorable towards one of the two countries. They are inherently used from an ethnic and identitarian point of view from what I see. Given that an Aromanian who collaborated with nationalist forces of other nations does not fit within this practice, even if it resembles it, I prefer that these categories be removed from the article. I also admit having strong feelings regarding this case (probably WP:OWNERSHIP manifesting itself). Even so, I wanted to make it clear that I have understood, or at least I hope so, your logic behind your decision to include them. Thanks for taking your time to explain. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 16:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Super Dromaeosaurus: No, thank you for your immense patience and courtesy. As noted, it was a judgment call, and a proposal; if you feel strongly about reducing the scope of the category, I would not object if you removed them from the article. Dahn (talk) 20:36, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Roxani Soutzos
On 13 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Roxani Soutzos, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that, commenting on her support for the egalitarian Greek Republic as a Phanariote dame, Roxani Soutzos(pictured) said it was "[b]etter to be a servant in Greece liberated than a princess in Greece enslaved"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Roxani Soutzos. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Roxani Soutzos), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 29 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Diamandi Djuvara, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Diamandi Djuvara's last stand against the Ottoman army in Wallachia resulted in the Ottomans collecting 138 human tongues as war trophies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Diamandi Djuvara. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Diamandi Djuvara), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Ludovic Antal
On 4 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ludovic Antal, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1968, actor Ludovic Antal(pictured) recited a Romanian nationalist poem in front of tourists from Soviet Moldavia, causing them to flee for their bus for fear of a "provocation"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ludovic Antal. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ludovic Antal), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you for a great article, with a great line on the Main page (which has became a rare thing)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:37, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you might want to look at this edit. It looks like vandalism and has spread to Wikidata as well. I still haven't found the information that he was born in Faraoani.--Kun Kipcsak (talk) 06:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 12 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dan Simonescu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian literary scholar Dan Simonescu, who edited a chronicle dealing with the reign of Michael the Brave, had to delete any mention of Michael having "all the Jews murdered"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dan Simonescu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dan Simonescu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 20 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mioarele, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that three American bombers were downed over the Romanian village of Suslănești in May 1944? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mioarele. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mioarele), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 22 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Out of All the Masts, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mihai Eminescu's poem "Out of All the Masts", which Eminescu himself never intended to publish, has won posthumous praise as a "perfect combination of words"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Out of All the Masts. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Out of All the Masts), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 3 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Profira Sadoveanu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that writer Profira Sadoveanu and her novelist father Mihail once had to take turns defending their home against attacks by the Iron Guard? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Profira Sadoveanu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Profira Sadoveanu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 6 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mitzura Arghezi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian actress Mitzura Arghezi was once told by her father that her career path held "few satisfactions [...] if you're not a director's wife, a manager's wife, this and that man's girlfriend"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mitzura Arghezi. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mitzura Arghezi), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 23 October 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Carmen Petra Basacopol, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 20:47, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On 29 October 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ion Biberi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian author Ion Biberi(pictured) rejected Marxism at the risk of unemployment, consoling himself that "man eats 20 times more than what he needs"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ion Biberi. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ion Biberi), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
I think since the parent is Category:,People from the Prulincipality of Wallachia, the Innkeeper Category would best use that form. I think we might want to even rename it Category:Keepers of inns in the Prinicipality of Wallachia. I think inn keeping is a profession that the actual location of the inn being kept is defining. This does not work with modern hotel chain operators, but with inns up until the late 19th century your operator might not start out local, but thry become part of the fabric of the locale where they worked.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do not object to that approach. Dahn (talk) 04:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Immigrants to the Kingdom of Saxony
Thankyou for your contributions to the category on Immigrants to the Kingdom of Saxony. I created thos Category. My main activity on Wikupedia is going backward through year of birth categories starting with 1927. I started there I think sometime in the spring of 1927, but it may have been early summer. This approach allows me to warily detect where the birth year Category is wrong, which happens in about 5% of case, maybe a little less. About 2.5% of cases the birth year is duspuremmted by sources, not known precisely, or even in the opening of the article given as multiple possible years, but dome editor has imposed a specific year. The other cases the category disagrees with the article text. However I try to improve the articles in other ways, including placing them in historically correct categories. This is not an effective way to build specific categories. I try to build them when I have a chance, but finding entries to fill out categories can be hard. I really appreciate your help with this category. I am only back to 1846, so not yet finding that many people who emigrated before the formation of the German Empire.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
John, you're doing praiseworthy work, and I will readily assist you with it -- though not on a systematic basis. It is indeed questionable whether all German states could go through this categorization revamp, especially considering the case outlined against categorizing for the North German Confederation, and I also have questions about what such categories mean for the post-1871 period (when some of the German states still existed, on paper); but this effort of yours strikes me as possibly the first systematic work in actually providing our readers with a historical understanding of the political map as it was back then, not as Whig history would like it to be. The Kingdom of Saxony and Bavaria, Wallachia and Tuscany, Artois and Mecklenburg were actual states, and the legal reality of people who lived in them deserves recognition beyond simplification as "Germany" and "Belgium" and "Romania" and "Italy" (I say this without questioning the merits of each individual nationalism, which I actually like; I would just not like to be projected into the past). I also had to step in to contain this emerging philosophy: "the category is a bit empty, I cannot be bothered to check if it can actually be filled with what we already have out there, so let's delete it, because editors who worked on them are pretty much our slaves". Kudos, John. Dahn (talk) 16:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the
2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users
are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
Voting for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023 is now open!
Voting is now open for the WikiProject Military History newcomer of the year and military historian of the year awards for 2023! The the top editors will be awarded the coveted Gold Wiki . Cast your votes vote here and here respectively. Voting closes at 23:59 on 30 December 2023. On behalf of the coordinators, wishing you the very best for the festive season and the new year. Hawkeye7 (talk·contribs) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Dimitrie Ralet
On 28 December 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dimitrie Ralet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dimitrie Ralet, a pioneer Romanian orientalist, commended Ottoman reformers for not "blindly adopting what we in Europe take to mean civilization"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dimitrie Ralet. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dimitrie Ralet), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 30 January 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Stormy Night, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first theatrical run of A Stormy Night by Ion Luca Caragiale(pictured), featuring a journalist nearly beaten up by the Civic Guard, saw Caragiale nearly beaten up by the Civic Guard? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Stormy Night. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A Stormy Night), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 2 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article N. D. Popescu-Popnedea, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Romanian adventure novelist N. D. Popescu-Popnedea "generate[d] laughter" with his deposition at a political assassin's trial? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/N. D. Popescu-Popnedea. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, N. D. Popescu-Popnedea), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 4 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ioniță Tunsu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a street in Bucharest was once named after Ioniță Tunsu, an outlaw who used to visit his girlfriend there? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ioniță Tunsu. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Ioniță Tunsu), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
On 9 February 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Matei Donici, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Matei Donici, a general in the Imperial Russian Army, secretly wrote poetry with Romanian-nationalist and anti-Russian messages? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Matei Donici. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Matei Donici), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Michael the Brave has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Dahn, noticing your revert please take a look at Thumbnail sizes ...general, do not define the size of an image unless there is a good reason to do so and the Displayed image size. Cheers. Lotje (talk) 10:04, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And there is a good reason to do so. Dahn (talk) 10:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you say so. :-) Lotje (talk) 10:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They look awful stamp-sized, Lotje. Also, just having them around being barely visible, per this stupid new "guideline", is in contradiction with the superseding notion that images should not be used merely as illustrations, but that they should have some informative value. Dahn (talk) 10:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination of Pavel Chioru
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! CeeGee 12:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
DYK for Mihail Moxa
On
7 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mihail Moxa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in the first Romanian universal chronicle, Mihail Moxa shows "the God of the Old and New Testaments baptizing His stars with the names of Olympian deities"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mihail Moxa. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mihail Moxa), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
WP:AGF failures. You can choose to reflect, or not, but the misconduct presented in the ANI thread (permalink) does need to stop. Creating high-quality content is not a license that exempts you from basic civility. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. El_C 03:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]
DYK for Pavel Chioru
On
21 April 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pavel Chioru, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Soviet politician Pavel Chioru wanted "Moldovan", which he developed from a dialect of Romanian, to serve as a language of the "exploited" against the supposedly upper-class Romanian? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pavel Chioru. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Pavel Chioru), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page
.svg){kind=link}
